Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 8.djvu/562

 JOHN

492

JOHN

which is in the manuscripts usually given with "Chronicon Veuetum ".

Hdrteh. Xomenclator, I (3rd ed.). 963; Wattenbach, Geschichtsquellen, I, 485; Kohlschutter, Venedig unter Her- zog Peter II Orseolo (Gottingen, 1886) ; Monti coLo, La Cronaca del Diacono Giovanni (Pistoia, 1882); Potthast, Bibl. hi^t., I (2nd ed.). 666.

(4) John, a Roman deacon, lived in the second half of the twelfth century. This deacon and canon of the Lateran compiled a work on this papal basilica, and dedicated it, in the preface, to Alexander III (1159- 81), thereby indicating the date of its composition. It was obviously a secondary oliject of the author in composing this work to support the canons of the Lateran in their dispute for precedence with the ca- nons of St. Peter's (ed.Mabillon, "Iter Italicum", II, 560-76; P. L., CXCIV, 1543-50).

HoRTER, Nomcnclator. 11 (3rd ed.), 150; De Rossi, Inscrip- tiones Christiana urbis Roma, II (Rome, 1888), 195-305.

J. P. KlRSCH.

John the Evangelist, Saint. — I. New Testa- ment Accounts. — John was the son of Zebedee and Salome, and the brother of James the Greater. In the Gospels the two brothers are often called after theu- father "the sons of Zebedee" and received from Christ the honourable title of Boanerges, i. e. " sons of thunder" (Mark, iii, 17). Originally they were fisher- men and fished with their father in the Lake of Gene- sareth. According to the usual and entirely probable explanation they became, however, for a time disciples of John the Baptist, and were called by Christ from the circle of John's followers, together with Peter and Andrew, to become His disciples (John, i, 35-42). The first disciples returned with their new Master from the Jordan to Galilee and apparently both John and the others remained for some time with Jesus (cf. John, ii, 12, 22; iv, 2, 8, 27 sqq.). Yet after the second re- turn from Judea John and his companions went back again to their trade of fisliing until he and they were called by Christ to definitive discipleship (Matt., iv, 18-22; Mark, i, 16-20). In the hsts of the Apostles John has the second place (Acts, i, 13), the third (Mark, iii, 17), and the fourth (Matt., x, 3; Luke, vi, 14), yet always after James with the exception of a few passages (Luke, viii, 51; Lx, 28 in the Greek text; Acts, i, 13).

From James being thus placed first, the conclusion is drawn that John was the younger of the two brothers. In any case John had a prominent position in the Apostolic body. Peter, James, and he were the only witnesses of the raising of Jairus's daughter (Mark, v, 37), of the Transfiguration (Matt., xvii, 1), and of the Agony in Gethsemani (Matt., xxvi, 37). Only he and Peter were sent into the city to make the preparation for the Last Supper (Luke, xxii, 8). At the Supper it- self his place was next to Christ on Whose breast he leaned (John, xiii, 23, 25). According to the general interpretation John was also that "other disciple" who with Peter followed Christ after the arre-st into the palace of the high-priest [John, xviii, 15; — Belser, " Leidensgeschichte" (Freiburg, 1903), 295 sqq., 299 sq., opposes this view]. John alone remained near his beloved Master at the foot of the Cross on Calvary with the Mother of Jesus and the pious women, and took the desolate Mother into his care as the last legacy of Christ (John, xix, 25-27). After the Resurrection John with Peter was the first of the disciples to hasten to the grave and he was the first to believe that Christ had truly risen (John, xx, 2-10). When later Christ appeared at the Lake of Genesareth John was also the first of the seven di.seiples present who recognized his Master standing on the shore (John, xxi, 7). The Fourth Evangelist has shown us most clearly how close the relationshi)! was in which he always stood to his Lord and Master by the title with which he is ac- customed to indicate liiinsclf without giving his name: "tlie disciple whom Jesus loved". After Christ's

Ascension and the Descent of the Holy Spirit, John took, together with Peter, a prominent part in the founding and guidance of the Church. We see him in the company of Peter at the healing of the lame man in the Temple (Acts, iii, 1 sqq.). With Peter he is also tlirown into prison (Acts, iv, 3). Again, we find him with the prince of the Apostles visiting the newly converted in Samaria (Acts, viii, 14).

We have no positive information concerning the duration of this activity in Palestine. Apparently John in common ^\'ith the other Apostles remained some twelve years in this first field of labovu", until the persecution of Herod Agrippa I led to the scattering of the Apostles through the various provinces of the Roman Empire (cf. Acts, xii, 1-17). Notwithstand- ing the opinion to the contrary of many writers, it does not appear improbable that John then went for the first time to Asia Minor and exercised his ApostoUc office in various provinces there. In any case a Christian community was already in existence at Ephesus before Paul's first labours there (cf. "the brethren". Acts, x\-iii, 27, in addition to Priscilla and Aquila), and it is easy to connect a sojourn of John in these provinces with the fact that the Holy Ghost did not permit the Apostle Paul on his second missionary journey to proclaim the Gospel in Asia, Mysia, and Bithynia (Acts, xvi, 6 sq.). There is just as little against such an acceptation in the later account in Acts of St. Paul's third missionary journey. But in any case such a sojourn l^y John in Asia in this first period was neither long nor uninterrupted. He re- turned with the other disciples to Jerusalem for the Apostolic Council (about A. D. 51). St. Paul in op- posing his enemies in Galatia names John explicitly along with Peter and James the Less as a "pillar of the Church", and refers to the recognition which his Apostolic preaching of a Gospel free from the law re- ceived from these three, the most prominent men of the old Mother-Church at Jerusalem (Gal., ii, 9). When Paul came again to Jerusalem after the second, and after the third journey (Acts, xviii, 22; xxi, 17 sq.) he seems no longer to have met John there. Some wish to draw the conclusion from this that John left Palestine between the years 52 and 55.

Of the other New-Testament WTitings, it is only from the tliree Epistles of John and the Apocalypse that anything further is learned concerning the person of the Apostle. We may be permitted here to take as proven the unity of tlie author of these three writings handed down under the name of John and his identity with the Evangelist. Both the Ejiistles and the Apoc- alypse, however, presuppose that their author John belonged to the multitude of personal eyewitnesses of the hfe and work of Christ (cf. especially I John, i, 1-5; iv, 14), that he had hved for a long time in ,\sia Minor, was thoroughlj^ acquainte<l with the eontlitions existing in the various Christian eummuiiities there, and that he had a position of authority recognized by all Cliristian communities as leader of this part of the Church. Moreover, the Apocalypse tells us that its author was on the island of Patmos "for the word of God and for the testimony of Jesus", when he was honoured with the heavenly Revelation contained in the Apocalypse (Apoc, i, 9).

II. The Alleged Presbyter John. — The author of the Second and Third Epistles of ,Iolin designates him- self in the superscription of eacli by the name (6 vpca- /Siirepos), " the ancient ", "the old ". Papias, Bishop of llierapoUs, also uses the same name to designate the "Presbjier John" as, in addition to Aristion, his particular authority, tlirectly after he has named the presbyters Amirew, Peter, Philip, Thomas, James, John, and iMatthew (in Eusebius, " Hist, eccl.". Ill, xxxix, 4). Eusebius was the first to draw, on account of these words of Papias, the distinction between a Presbyter John and the Apostle .lohn, and this dis- tinction was also spread in Western Europe by St.