|
1:1: The very form of the opening tells us what cannot be put into
words. It does not give the usual greeting. In the beatific vision there will be no image: the soul, joined to the divinity without even an image in between, just contemplates and so is filled, filled beyond what we or any one can now imagine: "Eye has not seen nor has ear heard what things God has prepared for those who love Him." So now John can do no more than gaze on this stupendous reality: "That which was from the beginning." He does not say he or she -- the absence of gender seems more appropriate. It is a recalling of the vision with which John's Gospel opens: "In the beginning was the word". The eagle soars up and up -- suitable iconography often pictures John as an eagle-- and rests in that contemplation. We might perhaps compare it too to the <jubilus> of which St. Augustine writes in his tract 48 on John 10:22 when he says that at times we sing to expresses the deepest all-engulfing joy -- but when we have used up al the words we know for our song, we just keep on vocalizing melodically. Here too words fail, as they must always fail in this life. St. Augustine said: "He should not even be called inexpressible, for when we say that word, we says something," Pardonable exaggeration - for though we can say true things about God, when we take away from our words all that is in any way short of perfection, hardly anything is left. As Pseudo-Dionysius wrote: He is best known by unknowing. For we cannot with absolute rightness say: "In the beginning there was a good Father-- for there is no beginning. and when we say that He made (past tense) the world, it is all one eternal present to Him. And if we call Him good, we must ever remember: One is - good: God. Similarly in this way Plato could even say He is beyond being; while St. Gregory of Nyssa wrote well that the object of our seeing consists in not seeing. And yet John continues: "What we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes and your hands have touched about the Logos of Life." Great Saints before this day have feared to see God, for they might die. But John says he has not only seen and heard, but <even touched Him>, the Logos of which He wrote in the opening of His Gospel. Ecstatic, John continues: "And the Life has appeared, and we have seen, and we have testified and announced to you the Eternal Life which was with the Father and has appeared to us. What we have seen and heard we announce to you so that you too may have a state of communion (<koinonia - state of having all in common--we even have in common with Him, the divine nature itself. We share in it not in same degree as the Logos does, but in same way -more on this in comments below on 3:2-3> ) with us and this <koinonia> of ours is with the Father and with His Son Jesus Christ. We write these things so that your joy may be in a state of fullness." Plato had written in his Symposium that no god associates with men; Aristotle said friendship with a god is impossible--distance too great. What overflowing joy then to not only associate with Him, but to become of one nature with Him! 1:5: So this is the message which we have heard from Him and pass on to you: that God is light, and there is no darkness in Him. It is not enough to say God has light or dwells in light: He IS light, much as 1 John says later (4:8 ) God IS love. To say He has light or has love would be contrary to absolute unity. Hence He is love, is light. And so the creed says of the Logos: "Deum de Deo, lumen de lumine." (in mind there is this fact: if a candle is lighted from a flame, the second flame is as fully flame as the first. And he first is in no way diminished). The result is this: if we say we have <koinonia> with Him, and yet walk in darkness, we are lying, and we do not do the truth. -- The background is profound: <Koinonia> with Him means we even share His nature. But that divinity we share produces no evil, but only good, so: "no one who abides in Him sins", (please recall our words above on "focusing" in the introduction). In regard to "doing the truth" we need to know that truth in John, and elsewhere in the NT (e.g., Romans 3:4-7 ) is equated with good, and the lie with sin. It helps to recall an English expression that says someone or something is "true to form". Logically, before God said: "let there be light", He had as it were within His mind the concept of light. Since this was in that way in which He created, if we do the truth we are "true to form", i.e., we match the idea or form within God to which we must conform, in order to <be>, in order to be "true to form". Hence St. Augustine said well (City of God 14:4 ) that if we sin we move in the direction of <not being at all.> For it is only when and to the extent that we are true to the divine form that we exist at all, that we have good. So to walk in the light is to live one's life or to walk according to the concept as it were that He had in His mind before saying: Let it be." (cf. Jn 14:6: "I am the truth"). 1 John continues: if we walk in the light, we have <koinonia> not only with God, but with one another. For to love God is to will good to Him, i.e., that He may have the satisfaction of being able to give good to us (possible only if we are open to receive--hence we keep His commandments which tell us how to be open). But also we will that our neighbor be open so that: 1) our neighbor may receive God's gifts -- which is His love and 2) God may have the satisfaction of being able to give to our neighbor. So in this way love of God and love of neighbor melt into the same thing. If we act this way, then the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all sin. Of itself His blood has infinite power, but to be effective we must be open, by walking in the Way, which He is, walking in the light. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves. (Sirach 7:20; Prov. 20:9) for everyone sins to some extent. (DB 633). With ordinary graces one can avoid all mortal sins, and can even avoid <fully deliberate> venial sins. And one can reduce the number of kinds and frequency of sins of frailty--but cannot without an extraordinary grace avoid all of these. But if we confess our sins, He is just and faithful and will cleanse us from sin. He is <just and faithful>: This pertains to the covenant in which He has bound Himself to do good to us if we <confess> our sins. What does <confess> mean here? Even though chapter 21 of John's Gospel institutes the sacrament of Penance, the present mention of confessing might be something less formal--it could mean the attitude of admitting in general that we are in the wrong at times, especially in a sort of liturgical confession such as our <Confiteor.> Since we have no entirely clear mention of the Sacrament of Penance this early - it is clear in the <Shepherd> of Hermas - we suspect this confession is something less than sacramental. Further there is no mention of any form of contrition here. Of course it is presupposed that there is some sort of change of heart. But there is no such mention--merely if the evil man turns, he will live. It is worthwhile here to indulge in a bit of theological speculation. This passage does not mention explicitly any contrition, nor does Ezekiel 18:21 and 33:14-19. Yet in changing course, it is implied that the sinner came to see: "What I am doing is wrong. No more of it after this": Now perfect contrition is concerned with an offense to the goodness of God, who is good in Himself. <But since all His attributes within Him are identified with each other (cf. "God is love:"), then this change of heart is a change in attitude towards God's dikaiosyne, moral rightness, which is really identified with His Goodness.> So His moral rightness within the covenant makes it an act of <dikaiosyne> to forgive. (On <dikaiosyne> = Hebrew <sedaqah> cf. appendix to Wm. Most <The Thought of St. Paul>). God who is eager to save all, will gladly utilize this opening. |