ACC ~ John 2 v12

JOHN’S SEQUENCE OF EVENTS DIFFERS FROM OTHER GOSPELS

ORIGEN: The other three authors of the Gospels say that after the Lord’s struggle with the devil, he withdrew into Galilee. [1] Matthew and Luke, however, say that he was in Nazareth first after these events and that he left there and went to settle in Capernaum. [2] Matthew and Mark also mention a reason for his withdrawal from there: he had heard that John had been delivered up. [3] …

We must let the reader know, then, that the truth of these accounts lies in the spiritual meanings, because if the discrepancy is not solved, many will dismiss the Gospels as not credible, or not written by a divine spirit or not successfully recorded. The composition of these Gospels, in fact, is said to have involved both. Let those who accept the four Gospels and who think the apparent discrepancy is not to be solved through the anagogical sense tell us when the Lord came to Capernaum in relation to the difficulty we mentioned earlier concerning the forty days of temptation that can have no place at all in John. For if it occurred six days after the time when he was baptized, since his ministry at the marriage in Cana of Galilee took place on the sixth day, it is clear that he has not been tempted, nor was he in Nazareth, nor had John yet been delivered up….

The four Evangelists… made full use of many things done and said in accordance with the prodigious and unexpected power of Jesus. In some places they have interwoven in Scripture something made clear to them in a purely intellectual manner, with language as though it were something perceptible to the senses. But I do not condemn the fact that they have also made some minor changes in what happened so far as history is concerned, with a view to the usefulness of the mystical object. Consequently, they have related what happened in this place as though it happened in another, or what happened at this time as though at another time, and they have composed what is reported in this manner with a certain degree of adaptation. For their intention was to speak the truth spiritually and materially at the same time where that was possible but, where it was not possible in both ways, to prefer the spiritual to the material. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 10.3-4, 10, 18-20. [4]

[1] Mt 4:12; Mk 1:14; Lk 4:14.

[2] Mt 4:13; Lk 4:16, 31.

[3] Mt 4:12; Mk 1:14.

[4] FC 80:254, 256, 259; SC 157:380-82, 386-88, 394. The reader sees an example of Origen’s careful treatment of the literal sense. The seeming discrepancies he notes, however, affords him the opportunity for his spiritual interpretation, which the reader will find in Jn 2:16, 18.

WHETHER THE BROTHERS WERE INVITED TO THE WEDDING

ORIGEN: We must ask, however, why his brothers are not invited to the wedding (nor were they present, for they are not mentioned), but they go down to Capernaum with him and his mother and the disciples. COMMENTARY ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN 10.39. [1]

[1] FC 80:264.

THE BROTHERS ARE RELATIVES OF MARY

BEDE: It tends to disturb some people that in the opening portion of this Gospel reading it is said that when our Lord went down to Capernaum, not only his mother and his disciples followed him, but also his brothers. There have been heretics who supposed that Joseph, the husband of the blessed Virgin Mary, begot of another wife those whom the Scriptures call the Lord’s brothers. Others, with greater lack of faith, have supposed that he begot these of Mary herself after our Lord’s birth. But we, dearly beloved brothers, without any hesitation or questioning must be aware and confess that not only the blessed Mother of God, but also Joseph, the most blessed witness and guardian of her chastity, always remained wholly aloof from the conjugal act; and further, that those who after the customary manner of the Scriptures are called our Savior’s brothers or sisters were not their children but their relatives. Abraham spoke to Lot in the following way, “I beseech you, let there be no wrangling between you and me, and your shepherds and mine; for we are brothers.” [1] Laban [said] to Jacob, “Because you are my brother, why should you have to serve me for nothing?” [2] It is a fact that Lot was the son of Haran, Abraham’s brother, [3] and Jacob the son of Rebekah, Laban’s sister; [4] but on account of their kinship they were called brothers. Because of this most common practice in the holy Scriptures, we should, as I have said, understand that the relatives of Mary and Joseph are called our Lord’s brothers. HOMILIES ON THE GOSPELS 2.1. [5]

[1] Gen 13:8.

[2] Gen 29:15.

[3] Gen 11:26, 31.

[4] Gen 25:20, 26.

[5] CS 111:1-2. Bede sums up the consensus in the early church. Augustine is especially strong in his assertion that Mary remained a virgin. See Tractates on the Gospel of John 10.2 (NPNF 1 7:69).