Chapter 1
Theophylact of Ohrid, Exposition of the Second Epistle of St John
1 Exposition of the Second Epistle of St John
1 Argument. This Epistle he writes, as “the elder,” to an elect lady and to her children. The occasion of the Epistle is this: seeing that her children were conducting themselves well in the faith, while many deceivers were going about and saying that there was no coming of Christ in the flesh, he writes the Epistle. And first he commends her children for walking well; then, teaching that the mystery we profess is no recent thing, he exhorts them again concerning love, and that they should remain in the teaching that has been delivered to them. And next he teaches that whoever says that Christ has not come in the flesh is an antichrist. He charges them, moreover, that such men are not to be received by anyone into the house, nor even to be greeted. And so he brings the Epistle to its close.
2 Chapter-headings. 1. After the prologue, concerning an upright life in the love of God, through a devout and unwavering faith; in which it is also shown that one must not take a heretic into one’s house, nor greet him, and so share in his sin. 2. A promise of his own coming, held out in hope, for their benefit.
3 The elder, to the elect lady and to her children, whom I love in truth—and not I only, but also all those who have come to know the truth. Some have supposed that this Epistle and the one after it are not by John the beloved, but by another man of the same name as he, on the grounds that both here and in the one after it he calls himself “elder,” and writes to a woman, and to a single man, Gaius, just as to a single woman—which is not in keeping with a Catholic Epistle; and, further, that he has not framed the salutation after the manner of the first Epistle, for in that one he did not begin in this way. But we answer that in the first Epistle he did not do this—did not so write a salutation—because he was not writing to a determinate person, nor to the Church of any particular places, as the blessed Peter did, writing pointedly to those in the dispersion and indicating that he was writing to Jews, and before him the divine James; rather, making his discourse common to all the faithful, whether gathered in the assembly or not, he passed over the form of the salutation.[1] Here, however, he writes himself “elder,” and not “apostle,” nor “servant of Jesus Christ,” as the rest of the apostles do. He does not write himself “apostle,” perhaps because he was not the first to proclaim the word in Asia, but came after Paul—and not in passing, as Paul did, but remaining there and present. Nor yet does he write himself “servant of Jesus Christ,” for, because he was so greatly loved, he had the confidence to stand outside the fear that belongs to servitude. He saw fit to call himself “elder” only, either because he was already an old man when he wrote these Epistles, or because by the term “elder” he was also calling himself a bishop—it being customary, at that period, for the name “elder” (presbyter) to be borne by bishops as well.[2] In writing to a faithful woman, he held nothing back, since in Christ Jesus there is neither male nor female.[3] And in writing to Gaius, a single man, he has Paul for a precedent, who wrote both to Titus and to Timothy, and to Philemon, a private individual. So much, then, concerning the salutation. The genuineness of the Epistles is shown also from the manner of expression and from the rest of the ordering of the discourse, since here too he often leads the argument back, saying the same things about the same matters, with the addition of some small occasion, and by this securing his argument. To this elect lady he bears witness on two counts: the one, that she walks in love; the other, that she turns away from the heretics. He calls her “elect” either from her name or from her zeal for virtue—her whom he says he loves in truth, and not only her, but also all who are of like character with her, those who have the truth firmly established within themselves. For this is what he signifies by the phrase “that abides in us,” that is, the faith in Christ. And he says that he loves “in truth”; for it is possible also to love feignedly, with the mouth alone, as he himself, in the first Epistle, made plain concerning certain sluggish believers. Having used the phrase “that abides in us,” he added the words, “and it shall be with us forever.” And to these he again subjoins, “Grace and mercy shall be with us,” displaying the goods that blossom forth from perfect love. “From God the Father,” he says, “and from the Lord Jesus Christ.” He went on to add, “the Son of the Father.” For He alone is properly the Father of the Son. Therefore Paul too says, from whom every fatherhood in heaven and on earth is named.[4] And again he adds “in truth” and “love,” securing his discourse and [giving] a mark of the love of which he speaks.
4 For the sake of the truth that abides in us (and it shall be with us forever). Grace, mercy, and peace shall be with you from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love. That is to say, a love that is true and steadfast, and not counterfeited in outward show.
5 I rejoiced greatly that I have found some of your children walking in truth, even as we received commandment from the Father. And now I beseech you, lady, not as though writing to you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning, that we love one another. And this is love, that we walk according to His commandments. And indeed it is truly a cause of the greatest joy to find a man journeying without stumbling along the course that is run in the faith of Christ, according to His commandment. And what is the commandment? The one concerning which Christ says in the Gospels, He who loves Me will keep My commandments.[5] And here he calls Christ “father,” since He too is a father—of the sons given to Him, through the economy, by the Father—as it is said, Behold, I and the children whom God has given Me.[6] Observe, too, the genuineness of this Epistle: that through these words it agrees with what was said in the first Epistle, to the effect that he who loves God keeps His commandments.[7] For to walk according to the commandments is the same as to keep them. For the virtues are practical, and have their being in being put into action; so that he who has ceased to journey according to them does not even keep them. And “to walk” is said with reference to progress. For insofar as a man is active in virtue, he presses on to what lies ahead, acquiring for himself an ever greater habit of the good. It is in this sense, I think, that the words too are spoken, into which the angels long to look.[8] For so great is the magnitude of the goods given to us by Him who became man, that even for angels it is a thing to be desired to gain some brief comprehension of them; for this is what is meant by “to look into.” And one who is prudent desires this—not that which will come to an end, but that which advances everlastingly. And since it is not possible to grasp the whole of what is inexhaustible, it is at least desirable to come to partake of it in some measure. Having said, “I do not write to you as a new commandment,” he says this too in agreement with what is in the first Epistle. And he adds the work of the commandment: “that we love one another.” And he expounds love, [saying] that it has its very being in being lived out according to it, and that the commandment “from the beginning” was given for no other reason than this—that, he says, “you may walk in it.”
6 This is the commandment, even as you heard from the beginning, that you should walk in it. For many deceivers have entered into the world, who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh. He turns the same matters over and over. By means of love he provides for their steadfastness, [warning them] not to break away after the deceivers who are already walking about in the world and who set at naught the Lord’s sojourn in the flesh; and by means of walking according to the commandment that is “from the beginning,” he shows that the opinion of the erring heretics is a recent thing, and he exhorts these believers to hold fast to the commandment that is from the beginning, and not to be led away by their deceit. For Christ too charged the disciples concerning these deceivers, saying, Many shall come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ’; and they shall deceive many. Do not, then, go after them.[9] He commands, therefore, that all who keep the commandments not be deceived, but rather regard the one who says these things as an antichrist. “For this one,” he says, “is the antichrist and the deceiver.” And in saying, “Those who do not confess Jesus Christ coming in the flesh”—but not “having come”—he makes it plain that there were some who rejected the second coming of Christ; since the Lord Himself also says, “Many shall come in My name,” speaking not of His first coming, but of the second. Yet, by a true reckoning, those who reject the second coming cast away the first as well. For if He who came in the flesh also promised the second coming, then assuredly the one who rejects the second rejects the first also. For if he believes that He came, he will also hold trustworthy the promise of the One who came; but if he rejects the promise, there is no reason why he should not reject the first coming too. For this reason, I think, the beloved disciple also used this expression as he did—saying “coming,” but not “having come”—so that he might embrace those who deny both comings of the Lord in the flesh.
7 This is the deceiver and the antichrist. To these words there must be supplied, for fuller clarity, the phrase, “Whoever, then, does not confess these things,” so that the clause “This is the deceiver and the antichrist” may follow aptly upon it. For without this the sentence is disjointed.
8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not the things we have worked for, but receive a full reward. Everyone who transgresses and does not abide in the teaching of Christ has not God. He charges them to guard themselves against those who deny both comings of the Lord; and he adds the reason: “Lest,” he says, “by mingling with them, you lose what you have worked for, but rather receive your reward undiminished.” But perhaps one of these people will say: “What, then? If I do not believe in the coming of Christ in the flesh, but live by doing good, am I not able—with these works—to be ranked among the godly, and to receive the reward for them?” Anticipating this objection, the Apostle says that no one who sets aside the sojourn of Christ in the flesh should suppose either that he will receive the perfect recompense of works—which is owed even to the faithful—or that he will be reckoned godly at all; but everyone who transgresses His commandment—that is, the commandment of Christ, who has come—and does not abide in His teaching, has not God. For if the one who has come to teach men the perfect knowledge of God should be set at naught, how could he still be godly who drives away the expositor of things divine? Such a one, then, is godless; whereas, on the contrary, the one who is firmly established in the teaching of Christ is filled with God and dear to God, and has within himself all the fullness of the Godhead—namely, Father and Son and Holy Spirit. For Christ Himself teaches: concerning the Father, saying, All that the Father has is Mine[10] (and in many places He teaches concerning Himself and concerning the Father, that the one is Father and the other Son); and concerning the Spirit, when He says, The Holy Spirit, who proceeds from the Father;[11] and more perfectly than these, when He says, Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.[12] And if here, by the disciple of the Lord, only the Father and the Son are mentioned, and not indeed the Holy Spirit, be not scandalized; for it was pressing to speak here only of this—of the Father, I mean, and of the Son.
9 He who abides in the teaching of Christ, this one has both the Father and the Son. He abides in the teaching of Christ—that is, in the evangelical instruction—who thinks, and teaches, and acts according to it, living at once contemplatively and actively; but he who withdraws himself from it is godless. For just as the one who, by an exact manner of life, makes himself God’s own—like Abraham, inasmuch as he heard from Him, “I am your God”[13]—so too the one who lives outside the commandment of the Gospel is godless, having cut himself off from having God. And this man being godless—the one, I mean, who has estranged himself from the divine instruction—he who abides in it has both the Father and the Son. For concerning such a one the Son also said, We will come to him and make Our abode with him[14]—together with the Father, that is. For out of the keeping of the commandments he has made himself a temple and dwelling-place of God, and has God dwelling within him. Now since “to have God” is twofold—for all created things also are said to have God, with reference to which Paul too has said, For in Him we live and move and have our being,[15] and this is understood according to the mode of their subsistence; whereas in another sense we say that the one who serves God through moral nobility “has” God, in which signification He is called “the God of Abraham” also, and of Isaac, and, in general, of the God-loving Hebrews[16]—we must therefore give heed now to the words, “He who has the Son has the Father also.” For he who has seen the Son, as He Himself says, has seen the Father;[17] and conversely, I am in the Father, and the Father in Me, the same Lord says.[18] So that from this too the consubstantiality of the Father and the Son is made known. But if anyone should say that on this principle the one who receives the disciples also has the Father and the Son—inasmuch as it is said, He who receives you receives Me, and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me[19]—let such a one know that he speaks wrongly, and presses his objection in a manner that is not fitting. For these words were spoken concerning the teaching: since the one who received the apostles and their teaching with assent received, through them, the Father and the Son as well, as teachers. And in another way: since he who abides in the teaching has both the Son and the Father, and the apostles abode in the teaching, so as even to proclaim it, the one who received them—they being temples of God—has, through them, the Father also.[20]
10 If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into the house, and do not bid him welcome. For he who bids him welcome shares in his evil works. Having many things to write to you, I did not wish to do so with paper and ink; but I hope to come to you and to speak mouth to mouth, that our joy may be full. He gives firm assurance to those to whom the Epistle is addressed, that if anyone comes to them without this confession, he should not only obtain no shelter from them, but should not even be granted a greeting—and he says this precisely, since this greeting is owed only to those of like character and like faith with us. For to whom should we wish “welcome,” save to those of like character and like faith? So that if such a greeting were offered by us to the impious, it would assuredly be offered to them as though to those of like character and like faith with us, and we would thereby have made them our partners, and these men would have dragged us down into their own pit. And the reason for setting out the Epistle so concisely—both here and in the one after it—he himself taught: namely, his hope of coming in person, and of supplying through a face-to-face meeting whatever is lacking.
11 The children of your elect sister greet you. Amen. Some wish by this to establish that this Epistle is not [written] to a woman, but to a Church; concerning which there need be no contention for anyone who is so inclined.[21]
12 The end of the Second Epistle of John: thirteen stichoi.[22]