The human personality of Jesus Christ is a topic that has long fascinated students of the Gospels. Christ seemed in his most ordinary encounters with others to be able to draw on the Spirit and establish a relationship in a totally new way. There seems to be a history of his personal charismata as well as his divine mission to men.

Unfortunately, reading the Gospel looking for clues to the personal psychology of Jesus is far more eisegesis than exegesis. Despite this major flaw, the Gospel of John can provide a basis for making exegesis-style speculations about the nature of Christ's relationships with others, and to extrapolate from this to some idea of the nature of Christian counseling.

Christian counseling, the marriage of the spiritual level of man's existence with the problem-solving approaches of modern psychology, is relatively new and certainly a more counter-culture approach to traditional movements within the Church, or at least the 'established' Church. “Spiritual health lies with a Christianity that has more in common dynamically with the counterculture that strives for honesty, openness, sharing, genuineness, loving confrontation and awareness, than it has with those centres where establishment religion presses upon the clergy and people for compliance with restrictive ways of avoiding closeness to all those Christ-like qualities.”(1)

It is natural that the Church should return to the healing of man, as a return to the active the Gospel. Counseling is an area well supported in the Gospels by the attention given not only to the physical processes of healing but also, quite accurately, to mental illnesses. Whether in theory possession by devils in scripture is seen as a real possession or merely as an aetiological expression for mental illness, there is direct Gospel evidence to support both Christ's rebuke of the state of the person, and his cure. "The dialogues of Jesus with individual people remain at the center of the Gospel. He spoke so specifically in relation to the needs of the individuals."(2)

Frank Lake, clinical theologian, has developed a model of the dynamic cycle in the life of Christ which is later used as the basis for the analysis and origins of normal healthy human personality structure. Using St. John's Gospel, he cites four stages of development: acceptance, sustenance, status and achievement. The first stage(analogous to pre-birth infancy experiences of human infants) postulates Christ's acceptance by the Father (Jn. 3:17; 17:5). Sustenance is shown in the direct relationship with the Father through prayer. Constant access to the Father is also a dimension of sustenance, shown in Jn, 11:42. In the second stage, where in human infancy bonds are maintained through eye and touch contact, the beginnings of seperation from the mother and ego identity are found. The needs in the second stage are for sustained sustenance. Lake finds this model in Christ's abiding in the Father (Jn. 1:18, 15:9, 5:20, 3:34 and 14:11), all of which refer to the sustenance found in the permanent relationship between Father and Son.

Both of the first two stages are seen as 'input', while the third stage of development indicates the capacity to see a personal identity separated from the figure of sustenance. In the life of Christ this refers to his specific statements of the consciousness of his own being: "I am from above" (8:23); "I am the Son of God" (10:36); "I am not alone" (8:16-18); "I am the light of the world" (8:12); etc. Everything is entrusted to him by the Father (Mt. 11:27), and Jesus by virtue of his sustained identity is able to say, "Follow me" (1:43, 12:26).

The fourth stage is the stage of achievement. In the life of Christ this is strictly limited by the will of the Father. "The son can do nothing of himself but what he sees the Father do." (5:19,30, 36). He can speak of nothing but what he hears from the Father (8:26); the words he does speak are from the Spirit (6:63), and he is to finish the work of redemption God gave him to do (4:34, 16:5, 19:30). In the human translation of this stage, it is at this point that the sustained and newly separated identity of the child is able to organize itself and reach out to the world. In the adult identity it is the stage where work is possible, and the goal of the work is that of Christ, service to others.

Lake's model goes on in its second stage to elaborate on the dynamics of the ontology of grace, and a fourfold phase of the 'being-well-being' which is dependent on grace. God grants acceptance through Christ, the obedient Son, and we are signed into acceptance through baptism, and the family acceptance of the fellowship. New life brought into being through Christ is sustained by the Spirit. Sustenance is through the Word, the Eucharist, the fellowship. In the third phase, "having been loved into abundant life by God, through Christ in the Spirit, we have a new identity, a new purpose in living.'(3)

The new status conveys responsibility as well. If acceptance and sustenance have been given us unconditionally, our motivation then is to love as we have been loved. Gifts for specific service are given. The work stage is the last, service to the world and Word.

Lake's Christ-centered model is the basis for the ontological model which serves as a training tool for Christian counselors to understand and guide change in the human personality, starting with an examination of their own growth. The four stage ontological model is divided again into input and output stage. Lake explains "the sources of personal well-being as being opened by love and care, sustained by the source person, who goes 'down' to draw the needy one into being by relationship and then opens up rich communicable personal resources. These respondants complete the input. A strong sense of status and identification motivates a movement to give out to others. The achievement of this service is output."(4)

What has any of this to do with John's Gospel? It will be my contention that, by examining the relationships found in John's Gospel between Christ and the other characters, a basic model for Christian counseling, similar to Lake's thesis, can be supported. It is a question of interpretation. Superficially one can argue that the historical reality of each encounter may not hold up under strict exegesis. However, the attitude maintained by Christ in his relationships with other persons in the Gospel, although undoubtedly arranged by John and his redactor, does portray a basic sense of human psychology. Lake summarizes the change in God / human relationships by staling that: "Unmerited grace, Christ's love for wrecked men, itself creates a new relationship and a new being."(5)

For the purpose of relative simplicity the text will be divided into sections: Jesus and the disciples, Jesus and his relationship with John the Baptist, the 'healing cycle', Jesus and the Samaritan woman, Jesus and the adultress, Jesus and Nicodemus, Jesus and his friends: Mary, Martha and Lazarus. I would stress again that much of the interpretation is taken from the carefully studied exegesis of authorities on the Gospel, but the interpretation of it is my own subjective model. I think quite validly that a case can be made for developing levels of understanding in the Gospels, starting with a historical veracity, with the Christology and theological levels and the socioeconomic pastiche, and I find no difficulty in seeing the psychological level as well. Being a novice both in theological discourse and psychological training, I may prove to be erroneous in both areas. However the purpose of the paper is, not to offer conclusions, but to present some interesting speculations on the personal interpersonal relations Christ had and the underlying psychology of those relationships.

JESUS AND THE DISCIPLES

In his Commentary on John in the Anchor Bible series, Raymond Brown speaks of Christ's coming as a crisis for all men: "All through the Gospel Jesus provokes self-judgement as men line up for or against him; truly his coming is a crisis in the root sense of that word. "(6) In his initial encounters with his disciples there is a sense of this same crisis and self-judgement. Jesus acts in two ways which indicate his awareness of the critical moment for the disciples. First, he calls them by name. On the surface this seems simplicity, and yet on one level the name is the personal summation of all that we are: we are called into life by our name; God, who is all Wisdom, knows us by name.

Jesus is in a different sphere of existence, that belonging to the spirit, but also present in the reality of the flesh. When he performs his 'signs' and his work, the gifts he gives are 'real' gifts, that is, they are from heaven; the 'real' water is contrasted with ordinary water; the real bread, the bread of life, is in contrast with bread which parishes; and Jesus is the real light that has come into the world.(7) By this same logic one might argue that when he 'calls' the disciples he calls them by their real name; that, throughout the Gospel, he is dealing on different levels with the individual characters, one level being the level where he both recognizes and responds to the real person.

No list of the disciples is given explicitly in the Fourth Gospel. Among those mentioned are Simon Peter, Andrew, Philip, Thomas and Judas Iscariot, Nathaniel. In the earliest pericope with the disciples, Jesus in vs. 35-39 clearly issues an invitation to Andrew and the other disciple, possibly John. The most significant phrase is "Come and see" (1:39). The earlier phrases set the direction of the dialogue: Jesus asks, "What are you looking for?". They misinterpret the question and ask prosaically where he is staying. Christ issues the invitation "Come and see". In the exegesis of the phrase, "What are you looking for?", two meanings can be found. Superficially, "What do you want?"; and, with deeper meaning, "What are you searching for?". "Jesus' first words in the Fourth Gospel are a question that he addresses to a very one who would follow him……This question touches on the basic need of man that causes him to turn to God, and the answer of the disciples must be interpreted on the same theological level. Man wishes to stay (menein: "dwell, abide") with God; he is constantly seeking to escape temporality, change and death, seeking to find something that is lasting. Jesus answers with the all-embracing challenge to faith: 'Come and see '."(8)

Implicit in this faith is the promise of truth, that Jesus will show them that which is real, the reality of the God/man relationship, his real self and, finally, their own reality. Although Brown does not include this in his commentary, I think it can be a logical derivation that Jesus is not only offering an invitation to the disciples but a challenge to 'come and see' reality. The challenge lies in the danger of the unknown, of discovering or being discovered in the secret part of the self that demands protection and hiding. Christ promises they will 'see' and Brown equates 'seeing' with faith throughout the Gospel. Perhaps it is also synonomous with truth, and with that contact with truth which can be a painful though cleansing experience.

In verse 42, Christ responds to Peter by performing both actions: He looks at him, that is, sees or knows him clearly in the spiritual and psychic sense, and he names him. This twofold act sets the relationships throughout the Gospel. In terms of human counseling relationships, Jesus sets a clear pattern for seeing what is there, the spoken and the unspoken message from the sufferer, the body language, the 'little flags' behind the dialogue. It is Jesus who "in the beginning of the process of discipleship……takes the initiative by turning and speaking. As John xv 16 will enunciate, ‘It is not you who chose me. No, I chose you’."(9)

If attention is turned to the individuals chosen, then the emphasis moves from 'seeing-looking-believing' which are all ways of describing the same action, coming to believe in Jesus Christ, to the effect of the actions of Christ's seeing. On the psychological level, the idea of deepening trust is present, leading to an ability through the relationship to accept self and others, and to greater insight which parallels the growth of faith. Perhaps they are the same, trust implying belief and acceptance in the relationship, faith in the person of Jesus. More importantly for the disciples is the reflection of Jesus' seeing: it is also the attraction to Christ: here is a man who knows / accepts / wants me. There is a natural inclination to want to stay with the 'one who knows'.

Dodd remarks that in "the meeting between the two……contrived by Andrew, who, informing his brother that he had found the Messiah, brings him to be introduced", there is an implication that Jesus "gave Simon the name by which he came to be known".(10) Brown stresses that the "name came from Jesus' insight into Simon".(11) The results are the same, the 'knowing' of the name and the giving of the 'known' name to Peter are the direct symbols of the starting discipleship and summarize the relationship between Christ and Simon Peter. Even in his weakness Christ will also see the later strength.

A parallel picture emerges with the introduction of Philip. Again Jesus 'finds' him, knows him to be Philip and offers the 'follow me－come and see' formula. Brown implies that there might have been an earlier contact with Christ, and in this second encounter Philip shows a growth of insight. He speaks of Christ as the very one, a description that could also lead back to the notion of the 'real' one.

Nathanael is called the figurative symbol of reaction on the part of the Jews who accept Jesus through doubt. The conversation between Jesus and Nathanael reinforces the idea of 'knowing'. Jesus does not only see Nathanael－he recognizes him, and by this deep recognition the invitation to join him is issued. Dodd characterizes the inter-change as a dialogue "of unusual form in which Jesus makes an observation not to, but about Nathanael, and Nathanael apparently overhears". "It is this evidence of Jesus’s knowledge of him, it seems, that evokes Nathaniel's confession".(12)

In these first interchanges in the Fourth Gospel, the character of Jesus already offers several insights into how Christ related to others. First, he goes to them, he reaches out to others. Secondly, there is the notion of his ability to 'know' others, and to convey that knowledge by calling them by their name. He seems to understand or empathize with both the apparent and the hidden areas of their personalities. Thirdly, he offers them a way of knowing, of awareness both of themselves and of Him, a look at his realities. By responding to the search of others for meaning and for truth Jesus calls them to himself and his Father.

In these Notes, the following abbreviations are used:－

Dodd:C.H. Dodd, Historical Tradition in the Fourth Gospel. (Cambridge, University Press, 1963).

Brown, Jn.:R. E. Brown, The Gospel According to St. John, vol. 1. (London, Geoffrey Chapman, 1966).

Brown, N.T.E.:R. E. Brown, New Testament Essays. (Milwaukee, Bruce, 1965). Chapter X, “The Gospel Miracles”, pp. 168-191.

1)Frank Lake, Clinical Theology, Introductory Pamphlet (pro ms.), 8.

2)Ibid.

3)Frank Lake, Clinical Theology, Chart N.c., Dynamic Cycle or Law of the Spiritual Life, in the Body of Christ (pro ms.). (Cit. modified).

4)Frank Lake, Clinical Theology, Chart Na. 1, The Basic Form of the Model (pro ms.). (Cit. modified).

5)Frank Lake, Clinical Theology, Introductory Pamphlet (pro ms.), 13.

6)Brown, Jn., cxvii.

7)On the meaning of "real", cf. Brown, Jn., Appendix I, 2, 499 ff.

8)Brown, Jn., 78f.

9)Id, 78.

10)Dodd, 306-307 (Emphasis added).

11)Brown, Jn., 80.

12)Dodd, 310.