From: 1 John 3:7-10
A Child of God Does Not Sin
*********************************************************************************************
Commentary:
6-9. This passage acts as a preface to v. 10, where the Apostle spells out the
criteria for distinguishing the children of God from the children of the devil — the
practice of Christian virtues and the keeping of the commandments of God, es-
pecially that of brotherly love.
To understand correctly what St John is saying here, it is useful to remember his
controversy with the false teachers (the Gnostics): these were trying to deceive
the faithful (v. 7) and claimed to have a special knowledge of God (gnosis),which
put them above good and evil, so that what the Church regarded as sin they saw
as morally indifferent and as incapable of undermining the union with God they
claimed they had.
To identify these heretics, the Apostle has recourse to words of our Lord: “the
tree is known by its fruit” (Mt 12:33). Thus, the genuine Christian is recognized
by deeds of righteousness (v. 7), that is, by keeping the commandments of God
and leading a holy life. And the qualities essential to the Christian life are incom-
patible with sin; these qualities are—divine filiation (”he is born of God”: v. 9), inti-
mate union with Christ (”who abides in him”: v. 6), and sanctifying grace, toge-
ther with the infused virtues and the gifts of the Holy Spirit (this seems to be
what the expression “God’s nature abides in him” means: v. 9). Thus it is under-
standable that “No one who abides in him (Christ) sins” (v. 6).
In fact, as long as “God’s nature abides in him...he cannot sin” (v. 9). Clearly St
John does not mean that a Christian is incapable of sinning; at the start of the
letter he said, “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves” (1:8). What he
wants to make quite clear is that no one can justify his own sin by the device of
claiming to be a child of God: the righteousness of the children of God reflects
itself in their actions, whereas “he who commits sin is of the devil” (v. 8), for sin
cuts one off from God and means one has submitted to the slavery of the devil.
The ancient heresy has grown up again, in a way, in our own time: there are
those who claim that union with God is not broken by transgression of com-
mandments, even in grave matter, provided one does not withdraw one’s “fun-
damental option” for God. Against this error, the Magisterium of the Church re-
minds us that “care must be taken not to reduce mortal sin to an act of ‘funda-
mental option’ — as is commonly said today — against God, intending thereby
an explicit and formal contempt for God or neighbor. For mortal sin exists also
when a person knowingly and willingly, for whatever reason chooses something
gravely disordered. In fact, such a choice already includes contempt for the di-
vine law, a rejection of God’s love for humanity and the whole of creation: the
person turns away from God and loses charity” (”Reconciliatio et Paenitentia”,
17).
10. “Children of the devil”: this is a common Semitic way of speaking, meaning
“the devil’s supporters”. In St John’s writings we find references to “children of
the devil” (cf. Jn 8:44; Acts 13:10) and to people who are “of the devil” (v. 8),
and Judas is even called a “devil” (Jn 6:70); but he never uses an expression like
“born of the devil”. Therefore, the expressions “children of the devil” and “children
of God” cannot be put on the same plane.
Also, “children of God” refers here primarily to the moral dimension of Christian
life, as a description (the opposite of “the children of the devil”) of those whose
actions show they are on God’s side. However, being children of God has a radi-
cally different meaning from being children of the devil, because it derives from
something transcendental—God’s causing the Christian to partake of his own di-
vine nature through the life of grace (cf. 1 Jn 3:1-2 and notes on same).
The criteria for distinguishing the two groups mentioned are: the practice of righ-
teousness, that is, striving for holiness and fighting against sin, reviewed in the
previous section (vv. 3-9), and the practice of brotherly love, as we shall see in
the next section (vv. 11-24).
*********************************************************************************************
Source: “The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries”. Biblical text from the
Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries by members of
the Faculty of Theology, University of Navarre, Spain.
Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland, and
by Scepter Publishers in the United States.
From: John 1:35-42
The Calling of the First Disciples
*********************************************************************************************
Commentary:
35-39. Through these words of the Baptist, these two disciples are moved by
grace to approach the Lord. John’s testimony is an example of the special gra-
ces God distributes to attract people to Himself. Sometimes He addresses a
person directly by stirring his soul and inviting him to follow Him; at other times,
as in the present case, He chooses to use someone close to us who knows us,
to bring us to meet Christ.
The two disciples already had a keen desire to see the Messiah; John’s words
move them to try to become friends of our Lord: it is not merely natural curiosity
but Christ’s personality which attracts them. They want to get to know Him, to
be taught by Him and to enjoy His company. “Come and see” (John 1:39; cf. 11:
34)—a tender invitation to begin that intimate friendship they were seeking. Time
and personal contact with Christ will be needed to make them more secure in
their vocation. The Apostle St John, one of the protagonists in this scene, notes
the exact time it took place: “it was about the tenth hour”, roughly four in the
afternoon.
Christian faith can never be just a matter of intellectual curiosity; it affects one’s
whole life: a person cannot understand it unless he really lives it; therefore, our
Lord does not at this point tell them in detail about His way of life; He invites
them to spend the day with Him. St Thomas Aquinas comments on this pas-
sage saying that our Lord speaks in a lofty, mystical way because what God is
(in Himself or in grace) can only be understood through experience: words can-
not describe it. We grow in this understanding by doing good works (they im-
mediately accepted Christ’s invitation and as a reward “they saw”), by recollec-
tion and by applying our mind to the contemplation of divine things, by desiring
to taste the sweetness of God, by assiduous prayer. Our Lord invited everyone
to do all this when He said, “Come and see”, and the disciples discovered it all
when, in obedience to our Lord, “they went” and were able to learn by personal
experience, whereas they could not understand the words alone (cf. “Commen-
tary on St John, in loc”.).
40-41. The Evangelist now gives us the name of one of the two disciples involved
in the previous scene; he will mention Andrew again in connection with the multi-
lication of the loaves (John 6:8) and the last Passover (John 12:22).
We cannot be absolutely sure who the second disciple was; but since the very
earliest centuries of the Christian era he has always been taken to be the Evan-
gelist himself. The vividness of the account, the detail of giving the exact time,
and even John’s tendency to remain anonymous (John 19:16; 20:2; 21:7,20)
seem to confirm this.
“St John the Apostle, who pours into his narrative so much that is first-hand,
tells of his first unforgettable conversations with Christ. `”Master, where are you
staying?” He said to them, “Come and see.” They went and saw where He was
staying; and they stayed with Him that day, for it was about the tenth hour.’
“This divine and human dialogue completely changed the life of John and Andrew
and Peter and James and so many others. It prepared their hearts to listen to
the authoritative teaching which Jesus gave them beside the Sea of Galilee” (St.
J. Escriva, “Christ is Passing By”, 108).
Those hours spent with our Lord soon produce the first results of apostolate. An-
drew, unable to contain his joy, tells Simon Peter the news that he has found
the Messiah, and brings him to Him. Now, as then, there is a pressing need to
bring others to know the Lord.
“Open your own hearts to Jesus and tell Him your story. I don’t want to genera-
lize. But one day perhaps an ordinary Christian, just like you, opened your eyes
to horizons both deep and new, yet as old as the Gospel. He suggested to you
the prospect of following Christ earnestly, seriously, of becoming an apostle of
apostles. Perhaps you lost your balance then and didn’t recover it. Your com-
placency wasn’t quite replaced by true peace until you freely said ‘yes’ to God,
because you wanted to, which is the most supernatural of reasons. And in its
wake came a strong, constant joy, which disappears only when you abandon
Him” (St. J. Escriva, “Christ Is Passing By”, 1).
42. What was it like when Jesus looked at someone? From what He says here,
He seems both imperious and tender. On other occasions His glance is enough
to invite a person to leave everything and follow Him, as in the case of Matthew
(Matthew 9:9); or He seems to be full of love, as in His meeting with the rich
young man (Mark 10:21), or He seems angry or sad, because of the Pharisees’
unbelief (Mark 2:5), or compassionate, towards the widow of Nain (Luke 7:13).
He is able to move Zacchaeus’ heart to conversion (Luke 19:5); and He Himself
is moved by the faith and generosity of the poor widow who gave in alms every-
thing she had (Mark 12:41-44). His penetrating look seems to lay the soul bare
to God and provoke one to self-examination and contrition — as happened to the
adulterous woman (John 8:10) and to Peter who, after denying Christ (Luke 22:
61) wept bitterly (Mark 14:72).
“You shall be called Cephas”: naming something is the same as taking posses-
sion of the thing named (cf. Genesis 17:5; 22:28; 32:28; Isaiah 62:2). Thus, for
example, Adam when he was made lord of creation, gave names to creating
things (Genesis 2:20). “Cephas” is the Greek transcription of an Aramaic word
meaning stone, rock: therefore, St. John, writing in Greek, has to explain the
meaning of the word Jesus used. Cephas was not a proper name, but our Lord
put it on Peter to indicate his role as His vicar, which He will later on reveal (Mat-
thew 16:16-18): Simon was destined to be the stone, the rock, of the Church.
The first Christians regarded this new name as so significant that they used it
without translating it (cf. Galatians 2:9, 11, 14); later its translation “Peter” (Pe-
tros, Petrus) became current, pushing the Apostle’s old name — Simon — into
the background. “Son of John”: ancient manuscripts include variants, such as
“son of Jona”.
*********************************************************************************************
Source: “The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries”. Biblical text from the
Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries by members of
the Faculty of Theology, University of Navarre, Spain.
Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland, and
by Scepter Publishers in the United States.