Thursday, 28 February 2013

THE COMMUNITY OF THE BELOVED DISCIPLE

-->
BOOK REVIW: THE COMMUNITY OF THE BELOVED                       DISCIPLE
C.Bastin ANITO
DATE:28-2-2013

Title               :    The Community of the Beloved Disciple
Author            : Raymond Edward Brown
Publisher        :   Paulist Press, 1979
ISBN                : 0809102749, 9780809102747
Length            : 204 pages

 Introduction:
            The Reverend Raymond Edward Brown, S.S. (May 22, 1928 - August 8, 1998), was an American Roman Catholic priest, a member of the Sulpician Fathers and a prominent Biblical scholar of his era. He was regarded as a specialist concerning the hypothetical ‘Johannine community’, which he speculated contributed to the authorship of the Gospel of John, and he also wrote influential studies on the birth and death of Jesus. Brown was professor emeritus at the Protestant Union Theological Seminary (UTS) in New York, where he taught for 29 years. He was the first Roman Catholic professor to gain tenure there, where he earned a reputation as a superior lecturer.
            Brown was one of the first Roman Catholic scholars to apply historical-critical analysis to the Bible. As Biblical criticism developed in the 19th century, the Roman Catholic Church opposed this scholarship and essentially forbade it in 1893. In 1943, however, the Church issued guidelines by which Catholic scholars could investigate the Bible historically. Brown called this encyclical the "Magna Carta of biblical progress." Vatican II further supported higher criticism, which, Brown felt, vindicated his approach.
            Brown remains controversial among traditionalist Catholics because of their claim that he denied the inerrancy of the whole of Scripture and cast doubt on the historical accuracy of numerous articles of the Catholic faith. Conservatives were angered at his questioning of whether the virginal conception of Jesus could be proven historically. He was regarded as occupying the center ground in the field of biblical studies, opposing the literalism found among many fundamentalist Christians while not carrying his conclusions as far as many other scholars.[1]

Biography
            Born in New York, the son of Robert H. Brown and Loretta Brown, Raymond studied at the Catholic University of America where he received a BA in 1948 and MA in 1949 as a Basselin scholar. In 1951 he joined the scholarly Society of Saint-Sulpice following his STB from St. Mary's Seminary and University. In 1953 he was ordained a priest in the diocese of St. Augustine, Florida. He earned a Ph.D. at the Johns Hopkins University where one of his advisors was Professor William F. Albright.
            Brown was appointed in 1972 to the Pontifical Biblical Commission and again in 1996. He was the Auburn Distinguished Professor of Biblical Studies at the Protestant Union Theological Seminary in New York where he taught from 1971 to 1990, when he became professor emeritus. He served as president of the Catholic Biblical Association, the Society of Biblical Literature (1976-7) and the Society of New Testament Studies (1986-7). He was a Roman Catholic priest in the diocese of Baltimore, Maryland. Widely regarded as one of America's preeminent biblical scholars, Brown was awarded 24 honorary doctoral degrees by universities in the USA and Europe, many from Protestant institutions.
            He died at St. Patrick's Seminary, Menlo Park, California. Cardinal Mahony hailed him as "the most distinguished and renowned Catholic biblical scholar to emerge in this country ever" and his death, the cardinal said, was "a great loss to the Church."[2]
Scholarly views
            Brown was one of the first Catholic scholars in the United States to use the historical-critical method to study the Bible.In 1943, reversing the approach that had existed since Providentisimus. Deus fifty years earlier, the encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu expressed approval of historical-critical methods. For Brown, this was a "Magna Carta for biblical progress”. In 1965, at the Second Vatican Council, the Church moved further in this direction, adopting the Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation Dei Verbum, instead of the conservative schema "On the Sources of Revelation" that originally had been submitted. While it stated that Scripture teaches, "solidly, faithfully and without error that truth which God wanted put into sacred writings for the sake of salvation," Brown points out the ambiguity of this statement, which opened the way for a new interpretation of inerrancy by shifting from a literal interpretation of the text towards a focus on "the extent to which it conforms to the salvific purpose of God". He saw this as the Church 'turning the corner' on inerrancy, while adopting a face-saving wording: "the Roman Catholic Church does not change her official stance in a blunt way. Past statements are not rejected but are requoted with praise and then reinterpreted at the same time. ... What was really going on was an attempt gracefully to retain what was salvageable from the past and to move in a new direction at the same time". While the document cited the two earlier encyclicals, it was clear to observers that much had changed. The Second Vatican Council, one scholar observed, “raised biblical exegesis from the status of second-class citizenship to which it had been reduced among Catholics by an overreaction to the Protestant claim for its autonomy”.[3]

Summary of the book:

Raymond E. Brown was perhaps the greatest Johannine scholar of the twenty-first century. In this book, Brown endeavored not only to reconstruct the history of Johannine community in the first century but also, by implication, attempted to give us an account on the formation of the Christian faith. He approached the matter predominantly from the perspectives of the Gospel of John and the Johannine Epistles. I suggest that both the Gospels of John and Epistles of John, and Luke-Acts are necessary to reconstruct the origins of Christianity. So these documents are invaluable tools to help us discover how everything had started. At any rate, this notion is a matter of considerable discussion among New Testament scholars, so let us go back to Brown.
            As I mentioned above, Brown’s basic purpose in this volume is to find out how the Johannine community had emerged throughout its history. He did through a successful investigation of both the Gospel of John and Epistles of John. By the way, the hypothesis Brown employed in this work is questionable by many reputable Johannine scholars, but he has strong arguments.

INTRODUCTION: Problem and Method in Discerning Johannine Ecclesiology

            The introduction deposits Brown’s plan for the book. He hopes to study the history of the Johannine community by treading primarily the Gospel of John, then, John’s Epistles on various different levels. By taking this approach, Brown assures us that both the story of Jesus and the Johannine community could be accessed and reconstructed. Brown’s method here is parallel to that of Bultmann’s and Wellhausen’s; the latter contended that chiefly the four Gospels inform us about the context of the church in which they were written, and only in secondary about the life of Jesus which is primary sources. By applying this principle, Brown approaches the matter by employing various reading levels and adopting four different phases:
Phase One, “the pre-Gospel era, involved the origins of the community, and its relation to mid-first century Judaism.” The composition of the fourth Gospel occurred prior to the expulsion of Johannine Christians from the synagogues (John 9:22; 16:2). The basis of this incident related to what “they were claiming about Jesus”.[4]
Phase Two, “involved the life-situation of the Johannine community at the time the Gospel was written.” Brown maintains the traditional date for the writing of John, A.D. 90. However, he accentuates that the main writing of John took place during that year, not the final product. Another difficulty in the Gospel is the continuous presence and echo of “Jews”. Brown also believes within the Johannine community there existed the insistence on a high Christology, “made all the more intense by the hard struggles with the ‘Jews.’”
Phase Three, involved “the life-situation in the now-divided Johannine communities at the time the Epistles were written”. Brown appeals to 1 John 2:19 to describe the tragic division occurred between the Gospel and the Epistles, which he explains in this term, “… the struggle is between two groups of Johannine disciples who are interpreting the Gospel in opposite ways, in matter of Christology, ethics, and Pneumatology. The fears and pessimism of the author of the Epistles suggest that the secessionists are having the greater numerical success ( I John 4:5), and the author is trying to bolster his adherents against further inroads of false teachers (2:27; II John 10-11). The author feels that it is “the last hour” ( 23; I John 2:18)
Phase Four, “saw the dissolution of the two Johannine groups after the Epistles were written. The great departure happened between the secessionists and the conservation side of the Johannine community. So they disfellowshipped among themselves, and were no longer in community. According to Brown, it was the secessionists’ initiation to divide because of their misuse of the Fourth Gospel. As a result, there arose publicly various sects or groups in the second century inclining toward, Docetism, Gnosticism, Cerinthianism, and Monanism.

PHASE ONE: Before the Gospel –Johannine Community Origins

            Brown’s argument is basic but profound. He contends that in the early period of the life of the church consisted of Jews whose belief could be labeled as both “low Christology” and “higher Christology.” By “low Christology,” “involves the application to Jesus of titles derived from OT or inter-testamental expectations (titles that do not in themselves imply divinity, whereas, “high Christology,” “involves an appreciation of Jesus that moves him into the sphere of divinity, as expressed, for instance, in a more exalted use of Lord and Son of God, as well as the designation “God.” In other words, some Jews highly regarded Jesus as divine, while others rejected his divine nature.
            Brown sees both continuity and discontinuity of this notion transmitted in other Jewish churches associated with the apostles.
Concerning John the Baptist-
            According to Brown, when the Gospel of John was written the Johannine community engaged in a furious contention with followers of John the Baptist claiming his Messianic status by rejecting Jesus. To fix the problem, Brown notes that the Fourth Gospel presents John Baptist’s role in 1:20 “I am not the Messiah”; and in 3:28: “I am not the Messiah but am sent before him.”
On the Role of the Beloved Disciple
            The Beloved Disciple is a mysterious historical figure appearing only in the Gospel of John and was the hero of the Johannine community. At his death, he was idealized by the people of the community. The Fourth Gospel clearly identifies him as “the Disciple whom Jesus loved”. Nonetheless, Brown agrees that the Beloved Disciple was an “outsider to the group of best-known disciples”.[5]
PHASE TWO: When the Gospel Was Written- Johannine Relations to Others
            Brown describes the presence of various groups of in the Gospel. The world, the Jews, and the adherents of John the Baptist are categorized as “non-believers detectable in the Gospel.” The latter were individuals who made no pretense of believing in Jesus. The Crypto-Christians (Christian Jews within the Synagogues), the Jewish Christian Churches of inadequate faith, and the Christians of apostolic churches are rightly known as “Christians detectable in the Gospel.” These individuals expressed explicit faith in Jesus.
PHASE THREE: When the Epistles Were Written—Johannine Internal Struggles
            Brown argues the Second and Third Letters of John were written by the same man, whose name was (or calls himself) “the presbyter.” The evidence is that relatively the same doctrinal and moral issues are discussed in I and in II John and that “both II and III John are concerned with the acceptance of traveling teachers interlocks the Epistles and makes it likely that all three have come from the same phase of Johannine history.”
            Eventually Brown would discuss what he termed “The Intra-Johannine Schism.” By referring to the secessionists, the group that deviated from the true Johannine Gospel, Brown insists that the secessionists who subscribed to the docetic theology, the denial the reality of Jesus’ humanity, were not the main opponents as traditionally conceived. “The adversaries were not detectably outsiders to the Johannine community but the offspring of Johannine thought itself, justifying their positions by the Johannine Gospel and its implications,” [6].Brown argues . Various areas of theology were subject to dispute in the Johannine community, chiefly the main points of conflict were Christology, ethics, eschatology, and pneumatology. From an ethical point of view, it is important to note that the secessionists claimed, 1) intimacy with God and sinlessness, 2) that they gave no salfvific importance to ethical behavior, 3) that they were accused for not loving the brethren.
PHASE FOUR: After the Epistles –Johannine Dissolution
            The “last hour” in the Johannine Epistles is a reference to the split between the conservative side in the Johannine community and the secessionists. As I previously noted above, the secessionists were no longer in communion with the more conservative side of the Johannine community. Brown remarks “the adherents of the author of I John in the early second century seem to have gradually merged with what Ignatius of Antioch calls “ the church catholic,” as exhibited by the growing acceptance of the Johannine Christology of the preexistence of the Word”.[7]
            “There is a subtle mélange of history and theology in John. The Fourth Gospel is clearly less historical and more theological than the Synoptic in attributing all this Christology to the first few days of Jesus’ ministry; yet the Fourth Gospel may be more factual historically in describing the first followers of Jesus as former disciples of John the Baptist and in having them called in the Jordan valley rather than at the Lake of Galilee”.[8]

Support

  • Brown has been described as “the premier Johannine scholar in the English-speaking world.” Terrence T. Prendergast stated that “for nearly 40 years Father Brown caught the entire church up into the excitement and new possibilities of scriptural scholarship." Much of Brown's work was given a Nihil obstat and an Imprimatur (the "nihil obstat" is a statement by an official reviewer, appointed by a bishop, that "nothing stands in the way" of a book being given an imprimatur; the "imprimatur," which must normally be issued by a bishop of the diocese of publication, is the official endorsement — "let it be printed" — that a book contains nothing damaging to Catholic faith and morals). Brown was the expert appointed to review and provide the nihil obstat for The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, the standard basic reference book for Catholic Biblical studies, of which he was one of the editors and to which he himself contributed, as did dozens of other Catholic scholars. The biblical scholar Ben Witherington dedicated his book The Jesus Quest to Brown (along with John P. Meier).
  • Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, who has written presenting the infancy narratives and John’s Gospel as historically reliable, was personally complimentary of Brown and his scholarship, and has been quoted as saying he "would be very happy if we had many exegetes like Father Brown".[9]

Criticism

  • Brown's work was controversial among traditionalists who objected to the elements of his work that they regarded as casting doubt on the historical accuracy of numerous articles of the Catholic faith.[2] His critics included Cardinal Lawrence Shehan and Father Richard W. Gilsdorf, who described Brown's work as "a major contribution to the befogged wasteland of an 'American Church' progressively alienated from its divinely constituted center.”
  • Other writers, critical of historical Christian claims about Jesus, have criticized Brown for excessive caution, for what they saw as his unwillingness to acknowledge the radical implications of the critical methods he was using. Literary critic Frank Kermode, in his review of The Birth of the Messiah, accused Brown of being too eager to secure the imprimatur of the Roman Catholic Church; Jesus scholar Géza Vermes has described Brown as "the primary example of the position of having your cake and eating it."

  • Msgr. George A. Kelly in his book. The New Biblical Theorists (1983), looks carefully at the work of the late Sulpician priest Fr. Raymond Brown as the most prominent member of a whole school of post-Vatican-II Catholic exegetes committed to critical methods. He shows Fr. Brown and his "school" to be rather far from being in compliance with the requirements for sound Catholic exegesis laid down by Vatican II.[10]
  • Fr. Brown’s most vociferous critics included Cardinal Lawrence Shehan and Father Richard W. Gilsdorf, who described Brown’s work as “a major contribution to the befogged wasteland of an ‘American Church’ progressively alienated from its divinely constituted center.”

Bibliography

BOOK:
  1. Raymond E. Brown. The Community of the Beloved Disciple  London: Paulist Press, 1979.
INTERNET SOURCES:
1)      Larson Michael. Published on March 26, 2008, Access date 15-2-2013,    available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown. html; Internet.
2)       King Henry V..Published on September 10, 1998, Access date 15-2-2013, available from http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=525. html; Internet.

3)      Sungenis Robert A. published on April 9, 2010. Access date 30-01-2013. Available from http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/188247910 . html; Internet.




[1] Michael Larson , Published on  March 26, 2008,  Access date 15-2-2013, available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown. html; Internet.
[2]Michael Larson , Published on  March 26, 2008,  Access date 15-2-2013, available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown. html; Internet.


[3] Michael Larson , Published on  March 26, 2008,  Access date 15-2-2013, available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown. html; Internet.

[4] Raymond E. Brown: The Community of the Beloved Disciple ( London: Paulist Press, 1979),22.

[5] Raymond E. Brown: The Community of the Beloved Disciple,34.

[6] Raymond E. Brown: The Community of the Beloved),107.
[7] Raymond E. Brown: The Community of the Beloved Disciple,24.

[8] Raymond E. Brown: The Community of the Beloved Disciple,26.
[9] Michael Larson , Published on  March 26, 2008,  Access date 15-2-2013, available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raymond_E._Brown. html; Internet.

[10] Henry V. King, Published on September 10, 1998,  Access date 15-2-2013, available from http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=525. html; Internet.

No comments:

Post a Comment