The healing of the man born blind in John 9
The lectionary used by the Church of England has done something slightly unusual in the last few weeks. Although we are supposed to be reading from Matthew's gospel, and the RCL used ecumenically has continued to do and then, the lectionary in Common Worship offers us a sequence of iv encounters between Jesus and individuals from the Fourth Gospel:
- Lent 2: Jesus and Nicodemus (John 3.1–17)
- Lent 3: The woman of Samaria (John 4.5–42)
- Lent 4: The man built-in blind (John 9.ane-41)
- Lent 5: The raising of Lazarus (John 11.one-45)
I sympathize that this sequence of passages offered the pattern of study in the early catechumenate, providing a framework for discipleship for those preparing to be baptised at Easter. Those composing the CW lectionary decided that we should follow this pattern and depart from the ecumenical lectionary—though I recall without any caption.
These four encounters practice not specially stand out equally a sequence in the 4th Gospel (for example, in connexion with the 7 signs or the 'I am' sayings) but they are highly characteristic of the gospel'due south narrative style. Whilst the gospel contains more detail of the names of both places and people than the Synoptics, it likewise features these close-upwardly i-on-one encounters betwixt Jesus and individuals, in which all the details of place and other people fade into the background, every bit if we are in a cinematic close-up. Some of these ane-on-1 encounters are also connected with each other; thus Mark Stibbe (in his 1993 Sheffield 'Readings' commentary, p 62) notes the prominent contrast between Jesus' encounters with Nicodemus and the adult female, in chapters 3 and 4:
| John 3 | John 4 |
| Takes place in Jerusalem | Takes identify in Samaria |
| Location is the city | Location is the countryside |
| Happens at dark | Happens at noon |
| Focuses on a man | Focuses on a adult female |
| The human being is a Jew | The woman is a Samaritan |
| He is socially respectable | She is a social outcast |
| Nicodemus initiates the dialogue | Jesus initiates the dialogue |
| Nicodemus descends into misunderstanding | The woman comes to faith |
| Nicodemus fails to see Jesus as the world'southward saviour | The woman and her village see Jesus as the saviour of the world |
Both these dialogues also swivel on the use ofdouble entendre, with a specific example (beingness built-in again, having water to drink) as well as the shared theme of light signifying understanding.
This detail encounter appears to be distinct from the previous chapter, in that the characters involved and nature of the dispute is quite different. In chapter 8, Jesus is debating with 'Jews whohad believed in him', that is, those who take fallen away on business relationship of his challenging teaching in John half dozen.66. (Mark Stibbe identifies these as one of four groups antagonistic to Jesus within the overall narrative.) And it includes the proposition of noesis of Jesus' unusual nascency, in the accusatory phrase 'We were non born of sexual immorality…' (John 8.41).
Generally, in this gospel, Jesus is depicted as something of a lonely hero; in this passages the disciples (that is, the Twelve) make one of their few appearance every bit a group—and they appear to be more than of a hindrance than a assistance to Jesus' ministry here. The description of the man equally beingness 'blind from birth' heightens the nature of his predicament, and and then will besides serve to heighten the wonder of the healing phenomenon. It is hitting that the disciples want to expect dorsum, and explicate the cause of the man'due south predicament, whereas Jesus wants to look forward and see the potential for God to be at work bringing both actual healing and spiritual insight. Perhaps this is a helpful pattern to notation in these unusual times.
Although a distinct unit of measurement of narrative, this episode is also continued with themes throughout the gospel. Jesus' repeats one of his vii 'I am…' sayings, which he beginning claimed in the previous dispute at John 8.12. But this goes right dorsum to the opening Prologue, where the Give-and-take is life which brings true calorie-free into the darkness of the world (John 1.9). Although this is a positive prototype, information technology is likewise connected with the complex themes of judgement throughout the gospel which we encountered in the Nicodemus encounter:
This is the verdict: Light has come into the earth, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil (John iii.19).
The contrast between the 'daytime' of Jesus' earthly ministry, and the coming 'night' when he is gone (presumably the context in which the gospel author is writing and his first readers are reading) is picked up again in John 11.9, in the episode with Lazarus that comes in next calendar week's lectionary reading. Merely in the terminal revisiting of these idea, in John 12.46, Jesus is clear that all those who believe in him keep to walk in the light, even if surrounded past darkness in the globe around.
At a large scale, the whole episode has quite a careful narrative structure, in which each scene in the start half has a matching scene in the 2d half (a structure known as 'chiasm' after the Greek letter of the alphabetchi 10):
Scene A (one–7): Jesus, the disciples and the blind man
Scene B (viii–12): the man and his neighbours
Scene C (13–17): the man and the Pharisees
Scene D (18–23): the 'Jews' and the human's parents
Scene C' (24–34): the man and the Pharisees
Scene B' (35–38): Jesus and the man
Scene A' (39–41): Jesus and the Pharisees
There is no need to run into this narrative construction as suggesting the episode is a work of fiction; there are many ways to recount a story, and we all know expert storytellers who being real events to life in the retelling. And at that place is overwhelming evidence of historical particular in the gospel. Merely this does make it an engaging story to read and reverberate on—so much so that yous tin can actually apply the passage as script for a drama with no editing at all! The overall shape does make the story unusual, in that the central section is the longest narrative that does non focus on the person of Jesus in all the gospels, outside of the nascency narratives in Luke and Matthew.
But the structure likewise has some other effect. Candida Moss is quite wrong when she comments (in relation to the Bible and disability):
When Jesus meets people with disabilities, he fixes them and that's a sign that he is powerful. That relegates people with disabilities to just being there to show the ability of God. They're not really real characters or real people who have feelings and needs and personalities. That pushes them to the margins of the story.
Nothing could exist further from the truth here. The story begins and ends with a striking dissimilarity between Jesus and his interlocutors. At the start this is with the disciples, and they are the ones who desire to treat this man as an exercise in theological reflection. And, similarly, at the finish, Jesus' approach contrasts with the religious 'puritanism' of the Pharisees. In the middle of the narrative at that place are 2 encounters between Jesus and the man himself, in classic Johannine one-to-one conversation. The first time, Jesus heals him, and the 2d time he invites him into relationship every bit a disciple. The homo is a real and rounded grapheme, who shows courage, wisdom and wit, and who is certainly not at the margins of this story.
At the smaller scale, the level of item, this narrative makes extensive apply ofstichomythia, a dramatic technique originating in Greek drama—just in continued use in plays and films today—in which different characters recite alternate lines, often in tension or contradiction with one some other.
Stichomythia is peculiarly well suited to sections of dramatic dialogue where 2 characters are in violent dispute. The rhythmic intensity of the alternating lines combined with quick, biting ripostes in the dialogue can create a powerful result.
This helps to heighten the contrast and tension between Jesus and his opponents, and challenges the reader to consider which side of the fence they themselves sit down on.
Jesus' action in response to the human being'due south condition—spitting on the ground, and applying the mud thus fabricated to his optics—is unexplained, and might appear to exist rather random, given that on other occasions Jesus has healed with a discussion. Simply information technology is characteristic of this gospel's business concern with the material world, the kind of interest which might explain why the account of the woman caught in adultery, in John 8 in most Bibles, has been included in this gospel, with its mention of Jesus rather randomly 'writing in the dust' (John 8.half dozen).
Sending man to a puddle call 'sent' is once again characteristic of this gospel, and the whole narrative, where real sight corresponds to spiritual (in)sight—only there is no detail reason to aspect this to the cosmos of the author rather than the activeness of Jesus himself. Sending someone to wash in lodge to be healed offers an echo of Elisha sending Naaman to wash in the Jordan in ii Kings 5, which peradventure encourages the homo after to depict Jesus as 'a prophet' (John nine.17).
The initial debate between the man and his neighbours puts the whole question of witness/testimony middle stage. In Jewish law, a blind man cannot be accepted as a reliable witness. Only in response to questioning by his neighbours, the man offers a full business relationship of what Jesus has done, which matches the earlier description—thus showing united states that he is, in fact, a reliable witness. The human describes Jesus' action as 'anointing' his eyes with mud. Anointing would usually be washed with something special like oil, and often by an appointed person like a priest; only in Jesus' hands the ordinary becomes something special.
The gospel writer has held dorsum from united states, as is his style, some data vital to the tension in the narrative: that Jesus has healed on the Sabbath. The criticism of Jesus by the Pharisees, and the nature of their set on, is completely in line with the tension between Jesus and his opponents that nosotros find in the Synoptic gospels. Y'all would ordinarily make make mud to form brings, then this could exist interpreted equally an act of work. Merely notation that hither, as in the Synoptics, there is no proffer that Jesus disregards or views lightly the keeping of the Sabbath; rather, he is challenging the Pharisees' interpretation of Sabbath regulations, and is concerned with the intention and purpose of these laws, rather than the minutiae of later regulations that have arisen. It is striking that the narrator notes that the Pharisees were 'divided amid themselves' (John 9.16); opposition to Jesus was past no means compatible, and we later come across that the Pharisee Nicodemus appears to have get a follower of Jesus (John 19.39).
In response to their interrogation, the human once again repeats his testimony: 'He put mud on my eyes, and I done, and I see.'
In verse 18, we come to the central section of the narrative. We are told that 'The Jews who did not believe' that the man had been healed summoned his parents, which illustrates the complexities in interpreting the term 'the Jews' in this gospel. The gospel itself is, in many way, thoroughly Jewish, focussing on Jesus' action at the Jewish feasts, noting Jewish practice, and claiming emphatically that 'salvation is from the Jews' (John 4.22). But 'the Jews' are often depicted as Jesus' opponents; hither, this must mean 'the Jewish leaders', since they appear in this episode to be identical to the Pharisees who oppose Jesus and criticise the homo.
We learn from the comments of his parents that the human being is 'of age', and so not in any way a legal dependent. But in a culture where family ties are understood to be more bounden than they are in much of Western culture, it would non have been unnatural to talk to the parents nigh the situation.
And this is the turning point of the narrative. The human being'southward parents knew that he was born blind; they know that he can at present come across. They too know the intention of Jesus' opponents, and the power that they have. So the question is: will they acknowledge the truth, and stand with their son in his testimony? Or will peer pressure and fear make up one's mind their response? Implicitly the narrator is asking u.s.a. the same question: in a world divided for and confronting Jesus, where will nosotros stand?
The man's second encounter with the Pharisees/Jews offer a stark contrast to the ambivalent and evasive response of his parents. Under the increasing pressure of the interrogation, the man but repeats his testimony: 'I thing I exercise know, that though I fwas blind, now I see.' Despite increasing assailment, it is the man who seems to exist on the front foot, offset teasing them that perhaps they wish to become disciples of Jesus, and so taunting them with sarcasm 'How baroque! You don't know where he is from, nevertheless he opened my eyes!' In response to the logic of his argument ('If he were not from God, he could non do such things') they are reduced toad hominem personal attack.
The term for ejection from the synagogue, ἀποσυνάγωγος,aposunagogos,occurs merely in this gospel in all of ancient literature (at John 9.22, 12.42 and xvi.2). It was therefore considered to be a technical term, akin to excommunication from the Catholic Church, which might be understood to have salvific significance. In fact, the get-go century Jewish synagogue was more of a community than a religious institution, and the main significance is that the homo has been excluded from the community, from its relationships and support, and is thereby publicly shamed.
In response to his ejection by the Pharisees/Jews, he is embraced by Jesus. Jesus hears of the human being'southward fate and seeks him out; having invited him to receive healing in their showtime encounter, he now invites him into the discipleship of organized religion. Jesus' terminal sayings, at first manifestly directed to the man, simply and so sliding into a final dialogue with Pharisees, combines Johannine linguistic communication of judgement betwixt light and darkness that we saw earlier, this fourth dimension expressed in the parallel terms of sight and blindness, with the linguistic communication Jesus uses in quoting Isaiah 6.ix–10 in relation to his education in parables (Marker four.17). Though he has come up to relieve the world (John 3.16) his presence and the sharing of the proficient news well-nigh him volition ever be divisive, since it demands a response—and so the world is divided betwixt those who respond positively, and those who respond negatively.
(Apologies to regular readers that, for the first time in xviii months, I failed to offer whatever comment on the lectionary gospel readers for the previous two weeks.)
If you found this article helpful, share it on social media, peradventure using the buttons on the left.Follow me on Twitter @psephizo.Like my folio on Facebook.
Much of my work is done on a freelance ground. If yous have valued this post, would y'all consideraltruistic £1.20 a month to support the production of this blog?
If you enjoyed this, do share it on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Like my page on Facebook.
Much of my work is done on a freelance basis. If you have valued this mail, you tin can make a single or echo donation through PayPal:
Comments policy: Practiced comments that engage with the content of the post, and share in respectful debate, tin can add real value. Seek get-go to understand, then to be understood. Brand the most charitable construal of the views of others and seek to learn from their perspectives. Don't view debate as a conflict to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person.
Source: https://www.psephizo.com/biblical-studies/the-healing-of-the-man-born-blind-in-john-9/
Post a Comment for "The healing of the man born blind in John 9"