Who is the elect lady in 2 John?

The Second Epistle of John is addressed to “the elect lady” (Greek eklekte kyria). There has been much speculation over this salutation. Was it the simple salutation of a Christian widowed lady or of a lady having an unbelieving husband or was it simply her name? Or was it, as various researchers have assumed – probably incorrectly – the salutation of a local church?

The last possibility is out of question for nowhere in the NT a local church is called “elect” or even “lady”. Only individual believers are elected by God (Eph. 1:4; 1 Thess. 1:4; 1 Pet. 1:2) and this in one Lord only, in Jesus Christ. Even more difficulties arise with the expression “the children of thy elect sister” in verse 13. It is therefore much easier to relate these salutations to a believing lady, her sister and her children. Peter also refers to his wife as “she that is elected” (Darby Translation only) in 1 Peter 5:13.

We do not know who was the lady to whom the old Apostle John addressed his epistle to, neither do we know where she lived.

“The elect lady” (Verse 1)

This is an individual Christian. If it were an assembly, as some have suggested, we would expect a precise parallel in the last verse, a greeting from church to church. We should not imagine that the recipient of this letter was called Electa or Kyria. There is no indication in the New Testament that anyone bore these names. Election under the dispensation of grace is directed to individuals, not to companies. Election is personal: we are not chosen in bundles.

The Second Epistle is addressed by the elder unto the elect lady and her children. The word elder has the same meaning as it has in 1 Peter 5. Some take it that the elect lady means an assembly, and her children the members of the assembly. But this is a very strained application.

The word "Kyria" (lady) excludes this meaning, besides other reasons which we do not follow here. She was a Christian woman of note generally known and beloved, having children, whom the apostle had found walking in the truth. She had also a sister with children, who seems to have been in the same place where the apostle was, probably in Ephesus . This is indicated by the last verse of the Epistle, "The children of thy elect sister greet thee." The keynote of this message to the elect lady, unknown by name, is the word "truth." The apostle lets them know that he loves them, as well as all other believers in the truth. That is the ground of real love; every child of God--man, woman or child--is best beloved for the sake of the truth, the blessed truth so abundantly poured forth in the First Epistle, the truth which is Christ Himself And that truth "dwelleth in us, and shall be with us forever." Thus the truth Known binds together in closest fellowship all who know Him.

It is well known what doubt exists among the learned,* and from early days till the present to whom the Second was written. And no wonder. God no more meant us to know the name of the lady here than of the sinful woman in Luke 7 on which so much foolish conjecture has been spent. It is as plain Greek as could be written for "an elect lady," whom with her children the apostle loved in truth. But she was not meant to be named; while the solemn duty laid on any was meant to be perpetuated whenever the like danger arose. Thus, while the injured glory of Christ claimed this service from the apostle, under the touching and lowly title of "the elder," while a lady and her children were the object of the Holy Spirit's inspired injunction (to cut off all plea that they were surely to be spared this painful token of loyalty to Christ), the written word expressly omitted to register the name in such a distressing case and paramount obligation. It is not "the" but "an elect lady."

All the notice taken of the Revisers' work is to say "1 (and 5) "lady" add marg. Or, Cyria." Either the British Committee have been remarkably successful or the American company have not been clearsighted, or some one else is disposed to be fastidious, which in any unfair sense I abhor. For there seem to be graver questions than of Cyria for "lady," though so understood from Athanasius (not to speak of Syrr.) down to Bengel, Griesbach, De Wette, Lachmann and Tischendorf. Wetstein, Grotius, Bp. Middleton, like R. Stephens in his third edition of 1550 (not in those of 1546 and 1549), decided for Electa as the proper name. This however seems disproved by the last verse of the Epistle, where it would be equally harsh to consider that her sister bore the same name, or that the epithet should be used so equivocally, if it be a proper name in the first verse. There remains the more generally accepted sense given in the Authorised and Revised Versions and all the older English, save the Rhemish; whereas the Vulg. and Aethiopp. (if not the Sah. and Memph., which seem ambiguous) support "elect lady," which Jerome took as symbolic of the catholic church, an alternative meaning in Cramer's Cat. Pat. Gr. viii. 146, as it was held by other ancients. It was an error no doubt, as was the application to Corinth, Philadelphia, Jerusalem; no less than the tradition which gave it to Drusia, Martha, or the Virgin Mary, each of whom has had a defender. But one sees not why in this case the anarthrous construction in 1 should be unheeded, "to an elect lady" etc. Where the sense requires the article as in 13, it is duly inserted. Some for another purpose have reasoned on the greeting, not of the elect sister, but only of her children, forgetting that she might be deceased or absent from the place whence John wrote, and in either case could not be included in the salutation sent. But the entire phrase, as it forbids the symbolical interpretation, general or particular, corroborates most simply the ordinary view, only with our indefinite article; which phrase may have been employed to veil the name of the lady, while the fact and duty are carefully recorded. — In 3 no notice is taken of John's peculiar phrase παρά, "on the part of God," not ἀπό, "from God" as in the Pauline Epistles. It is more intimate (cf. 4). That Cod. Sin.pm and more than ten cursives here read the more distant preposition ἀπό cannot shake the ordinary text, either here or, in some of them, the omission of the second παρά. It is a much more doubtful question whether κυρίου "Lord" should be inserted in the same verse. High authorities plead for and against. It would be the solitary case, if genuine, of so designating Christ in John's Epistles; but then it is the solitary case of a full and solemn salutation. Still I cannot but regard it as no less questionable than other assimilations to the style of the apostle Paul. — But had our American friends no compunction at the introduction into the version of the epistolary aorist or English present in 4, without even an intimation in the margin? In 3 John 3 they on the contrary give the proper aoristic to the text but the epistolary in the marg.! which involves the rest of the verse rather harshly in the same form. The perfect εὕρ. "I have found" does not prove it even in this Second Epistle. He only intimates the permanence of the discovery, while he does not go beyond the expression of a definite time of joy. — On the question of εἴχαμεν or εἴχομεν in 5 we need not enter now, nor the true connection of ἵνα. — The Revisers did well in abandoning the Text. Rec. and Authorised Version in 7; for "entered" (εἰσῆλθον), though supported by K L P and many cursives, etc. has no just sense, but ἐξῆλθον "went," or are gone, "forth." Compare 1 John 4:1, where there is no various reading in the corresponding word. On the other hand the same objection applies here as in 1 John 4:2-3. It is not the bare fact that Jesus was to come in flesh, but His person as so coming, which the deceivers do not confess. The participle, it will be noticed, is abstract or, as Alford says, altogether timeless. And very energetic is the statement, that "the" deceiver and "the" antichrist meet in him who thus dishonours the incarnate Son of God, though there is one full and final person according to prophecy to sum up and close the dismal category in his own time, whom the Lord Jesus will destroy in person. — In 8 reigns great confusion of copyists, who did not like the first person here, as being unusual and tampered with more or less from early times, The common text appears to be right. — But the Text. Rec. of 9 is utterly wrong in παραβαίνων "transgressing," which flowed from prevalent feeling and ignorance, instead of προάγων, going forward or taking the lead, the contrast of abiding in the teaching or doctrine of Christ — the truth of His person. "Going before [you]," as Alford suggests, like John 10:4, is ridiculously poor and wrong.

This is addressed to 'the elect lady,' but gives no intimation as to who she was. Some suppose the word κυρία to be a proper name, and read 'To Kyria the elect.' She is warned against countenancing in any way those who brought not true doctrine as to Christ. Love is governed by truth, accompanied with obedience — in a word, Christ. Obedience would prove the apostle's work to be real, and he would receive a full reward. As in the first epistle, 'that which was from the beginning' is enforced, in opposition to any supposed development. It is an important principle that one bidding 'God speed' to a false teacher, is partaker of his evil deeds.

This epistle was written to an elect lady. The word 'lady' here is 'kuria', the feminine form of 'kurios' which means 'lord' or 'master'. She was obviously a woman of high rank. Her husband is

not mentioned, which means that she was probably a widow. Nevertheless, she had brought her children up well, for they were 'walking in truth' showing that they had reached a responsible age. She was ruling her house and could decide whom she would receive as her guests, another indication that she was a widow. Our attention is drawn to the fact that she was 'elect'. 'Not many noble are called' (1 Cor. 1:26).

Following on the First Epistle come two short ones, addressed to individuals, and presenting to us pictures of family life in those days. One was written to the elect lady, or to Cyria, if the word translated lady was really her name; the other was indited to Gaius, the well-beloved. Now these Epistles illustrate the two great subjects of the first one — light and love — and take them up in that order. In the former letter we learn how the Divine nature, which is light, was to be manifested by that woman in the circumstances in which she might find herself, being called on to refuse any teacher desiring hospitality at her hands, who brought not the doctrine of the Christ. In the latter of these two letters we see the Divine nature in its character of love displayed in the house and ways of Gaius, as he entertained, and forwarded on their way, true labouring servants of the common Lord and Master. And the aged Apostle wrote to encourage him to persevere in that course, despite the opposition, and, if need be, the hostility, of Diotrephes.

The apostle had many things to write; but he forbore for the present, as he trusted soon to see his correspondent, and to speak face to face: "that," he added, as showing how he prized fellowship in the spirit, "our joy may be full." Having put the elect lady on her guard "against all that is equivocal with respect to the person of Christ," he had delivered the message with which he had been entrusted. He therefore concludes his letter with the words, "The children of thy elect sister greet thee." Who these were, or who the elect lady was, (vv. 1 and 13), has not been revealed. It is to the truth communicated, rather than to the persons, that our attention is directed. May we receive grace to lay it to heart.

The Second Epistle of John is addressed to “the elect lady” (Greek eklekte kyria). There has been much speculation over this salutation. Was it the simple salutation of a Christian widowed lady or of a lady having an unbelieving husband or was it simply her name? Or was it, as various researchers have assumed – probably incorrectly – the salutation of a local church?

The last possibility is out of question for nowhere in the NT a local church is called “elect” or even “lady”. Only individual believers are elected by God (Eph. 1:4; 1 Thess. 1:4; 1 Pet. 1:2) and this in one Lord only, in Jesus Christ. Even more difficulties arise with the expression “the children of thy elect sister” in verse 13. It is therefore much easier to relate these salutations to a believing lady, her sister and her children. Peter also refers to his wife as “she that is elected” (Darby Translation only) in 1 Peter 5:13.