Our Dear Unknown Friend addresses the misconception amongst certain โesoteristsโ concerning the โchurch of Johnโ as opposed to the โchurch of Peterโ. The brilliant Jean Borella also brings light to the correct understanding of this subject in his book Christ: the Original Mystery, which I thought helpful to provide clarity.
โYou know without doubt, dear Unknown Friend, that many โ and several of them are writers โ in France, Germany, England, and elsewhere, promulgate the doctrine of the so-called โtwo churchesโ: the church of Peter and the church of John, or of โtwo epochsโ โ the epoch of Peter and the epoch of John. You know also that this doctrine teaches the end โ more or less at hand โ of the church of Peter, or above all of the papacy which is its visible symbol, and that the spirit of John, the disciple loved by the Master, he who leaned on his breast and heard the beating of his heart, will replace it. In this way it teaches that the โexotericโ church of Peter will make way for the โesotericโ church of John, which will be that of perfect freedom.โ
โ Valentin Tomberg, Letter I: the Magician
โThis is the place to recall that there are not two Ecclesia, one Peterโs and the other Johnโs: this distinction is without explicit support in Tradition. Moreover, it would be interesting to know the date of its first appearance: it might well be that it is quite recent. St. Paul warns us (1 Cor. 1:12): โEvery one of you saith: I indeed am of Paul; and I am of Apollo; and I am of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided?โ On the other hand, let us not forget that to Peter โ displeasing as it is to the supporters of the so-called esoteric Church of John โ gnosis was also given, according to Clement who knew better than us. This does not mean that John does not represent, in the bosom of the unique Church of Peter, the function of the highest spiritual knowledge, the preeminent magisterium of gnosis, as is highlighted by his Gospel.โ
โ Jean Borella, Christ: the Original Mystery
โNow, John, who submitted himself voluntarily to Peter as leader or prince of the apostles, did not become his successor after his death, although he outlived Peter by many years. The beloved disciple who listened to the beating of the Masterโs heart was, is, and always will be the representative and guardian of this heart โ and as such he was not, is not, and never will be the leader or the head of the Church. But just as the heart is not called upon to replace the head, so John is not called upon to succeed Peter. The heart certainly guards the life of the body and the soul, but it is the head which makes decisions, directs, and chooses the means of the accomplishment of the tasks of the entire organism โ head, heart and limbs.
โ Valentin Tomberg, Letter I: the Magician
Much more can be said regarding the churches of John and Peter. In essence it is a commentary on the larger misunderstanding of the nature of the esoteric and the exoteric, which Borella puts to rest in the aforementioned work. I will not go into detail here. Suffice it to say that the the very crux of the Christic Revelation, the Incarnation, is the union of God and Man; not that man would be dissolved into God but of Jesus Christ who is fully God and fully man. We should consider ourselves blessed that the Eternal One has not sought to dismiss into the abyss the exoteric in relation to Himself, for that would be our end. The esoteric, then, is the depths of the Mystery. But the depths of God are unfathomable and beyond measure and so that which is esoteric may be exoteric in relation to the deeper. If one separates the esoteric from the exoteric one simply manufactures a exoteric esoterism, fracturing the Mystery into myriad parts unable to support themselves.
