La antidialógica de Paulo Freire

Scholars and commentators have long focused upon the tensions and apparent contradictions found in 13:1–17:26. Especially obvious is Jesus’ command in 14:31: “Rise, let us go hence.” Nothing happens after this command ex- cept further discourse and a final prayer. It is not until 18:1 that Jesus and the disciples “go forth.” But this is only one of many difficult passages and transitions in 13:1–17:26.3 _{Until quite recent times the resolution to these} problems was found by tracing a variety of literary sources that were eventu- ally put together to form our 13:1–17:26. The tensions that can be found in this long passage come from the ragged edges that remain as material from different sources, stemming from different stages in the unfolding history of the Johannine community and its Gospel. Some claim that problems remain in the text because of the respect that the final author(s) of the Gospel had for these sources. Others would suggest that these problems are the result of careless editing, or even that the present form of the Gospel is unfinished.

Although there are many suggestions, the identification of the sources behind 13:1–17:26 is based on the following elements. It is agreed that 13:1–30 comes from a special narrative source, related to other narratives in early the Twelve Patriarchs. For further details and bibliography, see Moloney, Glory Not Dishonor, 4–7; Keener, Gospel of John, 893–98.

2. See below, pp. 102–3.

3. For a good survey of the problems and their possible solution, see Brown, Gospel accord- ing to John, 581–604.

101

Christian tradition that surrounded Jesus’ final evening with his disciples. On the basis of the very obvious statement and restatement of the same themes in 13:31–14:31 and 16:4b–33, most accept that the oldest and original form of Jesus’ final discourse appears in 13:31–14:31. It begins with Jesus’ cry in 13:31–32 and closes with the summons to go forth to meet the ruler of this world, who has no power over Jesus (14:30–31). This discourse was a pre- cious memory in the storytelling tradition of the Johannine community and was retained and eventually incorporated into the final form of the Gospel. However, as time went by, the community developed the thoughts and the message of Jesus in that earliest form of the discourse, producing a more elegant and theologically developed repetition in 16:4–33. Both discourses focus upon the necessity of Jesus’ departure, the fact that he will not leave them orphans but will gift them with the Spirit Paraclete, that he will in- struct them on the need to love Jesus, and thus be loved by the Father, as they obey his commandments in the in-between time, at the end of which he will return.4 _{The message of 15:1–16:3 is quite different.}5 _{It opens with an} insistence on the need to abide in Jesus (vv. 1–11), followed by a short section that begins and ends with Jesus’ command to love (vv. 12–17). It closes with Jesus’ warnings about the hatred and persecution his followers will experience (15:18–16:3). Some have argued that the constituent parts of 15:1–16:3 just outlined also existed independently at some stage (e.g., 15:1–11; 15:12–17; 15:18–16:4a). That leaves the final prayer of 17:1–26, which also came from its own source, matching the practice of other farewell speeches that end in a prayer from the person about to depart.6

Something like this literary history most likely played a role in the forma- tion of 13:1–17:26. However, whoever was finally responsible for the Gospel as we have it devoted no less than five chapters to Jesus’ final evening with his disciples.7 _{This is about one quarter of the story. If so much space is} 4. For a very helpful chart showing the close parallels and repetitions across 13:31–14:31 and 16:4b–33, see Brown, Gospel according to John, 589–91. For more detail on this, especially the theme of the in-between time and Jesus’ final return, see Francis J. Moloney, “The Gospel of John: A Story of Two Paracletes,” in The Gospel of John: Text and Context, BibIntS 72 (Boston: Brill, 2005), 241–59.

5. Almost all commentators close this section of the discourse at 16:4a and see 16:4b–33 as the rewriting of 13:38–14:31. For a detailed analysis showing my reasons for making a break between 16:3 and 16:4, see Francis J. Moloney, “The Structure and Message of John 15:1–16:3,” AusBR 35 (1987): 35–37, 41–44. See also idem, Glory Not Dishonor, 55–56.

6. See Moloney, Glory Not Dishonor, 102–4.

7. The expression “chapters” is a handy way to describe the allocation of the material in the New Testament. There are no chapters and verses in our earliest manuscripts. After various

102

given to the account of this final evening, it meant a great deal to the final author of the Gospel. This must be respected. Whatever we might make of the tensions in this part of the Gospel, we accept it as it came to us and at- tempt to trace in it a deliberately designed and consistent message directed to readers and listeners.8

Before providing a suggested reading strategy for 13:1–17:26, we must resolve a further critical issue. Although most argue that the narrative sur- rounding the footwashing and the piece of bread closes at 13:30 and that the first discourse begins in 13:31, there are sound reasons for questioning this division. In the first place, verses 31–38 do not constitute “discourse.” In a way that matches verses 6–9, Jesus’ discussion with Peter and his prophecy of future denials in verses 36–38 are part of a longer narrative that began in 13:1. This is further supported by noticing that the theme of love opens the narrative (v. 1) and closes it (vv. 34–35). As well as my decision to read 15:1–16:3 as a literary unit,9 _{the study of Jesus’ final} evening with his disciples also regards 13:1–38 as a unit. The first part of the discourse proper, dealing with Jesus’ departure and its consequences, is found in 14:1–31.10

In 13:1–38, against the backdrop of Jesus’ washing the feet of his disciples and his gift of the piece of bread, even to Judas, Jesus shares with the reader/ listener a message of the unconditional love that he has for “his own,” even in their failure. But Jesus’ making love visible in his actions and his request that his disciples do the same (vv. 15, 34–35) are not limited to a focus upon the person of Jesus. He shows and tells them of his consummate love (v. 1:

attempts to divide the material, our present chapters and verses come from 1227 (chapters: Stephen Langton) and 1515 (verses: Robert Stephanus).

8. See Fernando F. Segovia, The Farewell of the Word: The Johannine Call to Abide (Minne- apolis: Fortress, 1991), 48–49. As Dodd once wrote: “I conceive it to be the duty of an interpreter at least to see what can be done with the document as it has come down to us before attempting to improve upon it. . . . I shall assume as a provisional working hypothesis that the present order is not fortuitous, but deliberately devised by somebody—even if he were only a scribe doing his best—and that the person in question (whether the author or another) had some design in mind, and was not necessarily irresponsible or unintelligent” (Interpretationof the Fourth Gospel, 290).

9. Rather than 15:1–16:4a. See above, note 5.

10. See also R. Alan Culpepper, “The Johannine hypodeigma: A Reading of John 13:1–38,” Semeia 53 (1991): 133–52; Mary L. Coloe, “Welcome into the Household of God: The Foot- washing in John 13,” CBQ 66 (2004): 400–415; Jean-Noël Aletti, “Jn 13—Les problèmes de composition et leur importance,” Bib 87 (2006): 263–72. Interestingly, in Brown’s schematic presentation of the parallels between 13:31–14:33 and 16:4a–33, he traces a vague parallel between 13:36 and 16:5, while the parallel between 14:5 and 16:5 is far more pertinent, and he finds one between 13:38 and 16:32, where there is none (Gospel according to John, 589–91). He then finds five parallels between 13:31–38 and 17:1–36 (p. 592).

103

εἰς τέλος) so that they might see in him the revelation of God: “I tell you this

now . . . so that . . . you may believe that I am he” (v. 19).

Scholars agree that, even though there is development from 14:1–31 to 16:4–33, the Johannine Jesus states and restates the same message: Jesus must depart, and the departure brings consequences. He must return to the Father and send the Spirit Paraclete upon the community that remains. They must live in an in-between time, observing the commandments and loving Jesus, so that the Father might love them. But between that statement and restatement of the theme of departure, in 15:1–16:3 Jesus addresses three other questions. First, in 15:1–11 he uses the image of the vine to insist upon abiding in Jesus, even in the in-between time, so that the lives of the disciples will produce fruit. Second, in 15:12–17 he instructs them to love one another as he has loved them, for he chose them; they did not choose him. Third, in contrast to the “abiding” of verses 1–11, Jesus tells the disciples of the hatred and rejection they will experience in 15:18–16:3. As Jesus was rejected because his mission from the Father was not recognized, so will it be with the disciples.

Finally, in 17:1–26 Jesus prays for himself, his immediate disciples, and all future hearers of the word. He prays for a unity of love that will make known to the world that a God of love sent him, and that all will be swept into the oneness of love that exists between the Father and the Son.11

The love theme is explicit in 13:1–38, 15:12–17, and 17:1–26. In terms of the literary structure of 13:1–17:26, this means that Jesus’ making known the love of God is a major focus of the first and the final episodes in John’s report of Jesus’ final evening with his disciples (13:1–38; 17:1–26). At the very center of the report of Jesus’ final evening with his disciples, he issues his love command: they are no longer his servants but his friends, and he has chosen them so that they might love one another as he has loved them (15:12–17). “No one has greater love than this, to lay down one’s life for one’s friends” (v. 13 NRSV).

Outside 13:1–38, 15:12–17, and 17:1–26 in this part of the narrative, the love theme appears in Jesus’ statement and restatement concerning his departure and its consequences in 14:1–31 and 16:4–33. Jesus’ message on love in these two parallel discourses is determined by their context, namely, his instruction on how they are to live their lives in the in-between time. Jesus loves the Father (14:31). For the disciples to be loved by the Father,

11. For a schematic presentation of the structure described by this paragraph, see above, pp. 27–28. This structure and theological perspective depends heavily upon the study of Simoens, La gloire d’aimer; see esp. pp. 52–80.

104

and by Jesus, they must observe his commandments in his absence (14:15, 21, 24 [negatively]; 16:27). Manifesting love for Jesus by keeping his com- mandments in the in-between time will lead to the disciples’ experiencing the love of both the Father and the Son, who will make their dwelling in them (14:21, 23). What Jesus means by his commandments he spells out by his actions in 13:1–38, his discourse in 15:12–17, and his prayer in 17:1–26.

Love in Action: John 13:1–38

A feature of the Gospel of John is Jesus’ use of the introductory expression “Amen, amen, I say to you.” Elsewhere, especially in the Gospel of Matthew (e.g., 5:18; 6:2, 5, 16), Jesus introduces some of his statements with “Amen, I say to you” (ἀμὴν λέγω ὑμῖν). Only in the Fourth Gospel does Jesus use the double “amen.” It can thus be classed as a stylistic feature of the Johannine story of Jesus.12 _{The expression is found four times in 13:1–38 (vv. 16, 20,} 21, 38) and plays an important role in establishing the internal structure and argument of the passage.13 _{The argument unfolds in three stages:}

Verses 1–17: Jesus washes his disciples’ feet and gives them instructions, ending with the double “amen” in verses 16–17.

Verses 18–20: At the center of the episode, Jesus explains why he is tell- ing his fragile disciples these things, ending with the double “amen” in verse 20.

Verses 21–38: Jesus gives the piece of bread and further instructions to his fragile disciples, beginning (v. 21) and ending (v. 38) with the double “amen.”

The Footwashing and Its Aftermath (13:1–17)

This first section (as also the third section [vv. 21–38]) unfolds in three parts, identified by the events and the major players in those events:

Verses 1–5: The narrator announces that what is about to be told will indicate the consummate perfection of Jesus’ love for his own (v. 1), even though these words are immediately followed by a reference to

12. It appears twenty-four times in the Gospel of John. The single “amen” appears more than thirty times in Matthew, thirteen times in Mark, and seven times in Luke.

13. For a detailed exegetic study of 13:1–38, see Moloney, Glory Not Dishonor, 1–28.

105

Judas’ betrayal of Jesus (v. 2). Knowing these things does not deter Jesus from preparing himself and washing the disciples’ feet (vv. 3–5). Love and knowledge flow into action.

Verses 6–11: Peter objects to Jesus’ washing his feet, and Jesus dialogues with him (vv. 6–10b). This leads to Jesus’ first statement on Judas’ future betrayal (vv. 10c–11).

Verses 12–17: Jesus instructs the disciples on the significance of what he has done for them and asks that they do the same (vv. 12–14). Jesus points to his lifestyle as an example for them (vv. 15–16). As Jesus’ love and knowledge flowed into action in verses 1–5, he tells the disciples: “If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them” (v. 17).

Forward-looking themes from the ministry of Jesus return in verse 1. He indicates that the mission that was yet to be accomplished (4:34) and the hour that had not yet come (2:4; 7:6–7, 30; 8:20) are present. “Jesus knew that his hour had come to depart out of this world to the Father” (13:1). The death, resurrection, and return of Jesus to the Father are at hand. In this hour, Jesus loves his own “to the end” (εἰς τέλος). As we have seen, at the beginning of his ministry Jesus explained to his disciples that his task was to bring to perfection the work that he had been given (4:34). In 4:34 the Greek verb used to speak of accomplishing/bringing to perfection is τελειόω. A noun from the same root as this verb returns in 13:1 to announce that “now” the hour has come (εἰς τέλος).

But the Greek expression εἰς τέλος, used in 13:1, as well as indicating to the reader/listener that Jesus has now come to the completion of his mis- sion in a temporal sense (in the moment of his departing out of this world to his Father), also tells of the quality of Jesus’ act of love for his disciples. To say that Jesus loves his own εἰς τέλος is to say that he loves in a way that is unimaginable. He loves in a way that crosses all boundaries of loving: he loves his disciples consummately. The use of the same word (τέλος) to speak of “the end” (chronology) and “consummately” (quality) is a further indica- tion that Jesus will reveal that love on the cross. The footwashing and the gift of the piece of bread are symbols and images of Jesus’ boundless love manifested on the cross. The introduction of verse 1 is “the most significant transition in the Gospel, introducing not only the scene of the footwashing, but the entire second half of the Gospel.”14

14. Culpepper, “Johannine hypodeigma,” 135. See Barrett, Gospel according to St. John, 438: “When Jesus lays aside his garments in preparation for his act of humility and cleansing he foreshadows the laying down of his life.” See also, among many, Keener, Gospel of John, 902.

106

Thus motivated, Jesus moves into action, aware that the hour has come and also that “the devil had already made up his mind that Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, would betray him” (v. 2).15 _{In this ambiguity, knowing that} he is from God and is returning to God (v. 3), Jesus prepares to wash the disciples’ feet and begins to do so (vv. 4–5). The dialogue between Jesus and Peter highlights Peter’s inability to understand the purpose of Jesus’ gesture, even when Jesus explains it to him (vv. 6–10). Jesus’ stripping for the washing and his telling Peter that he must accept this washing “to have part” with Jesus look to the cross for their meaning. The laying down of his clothes recalls the “laying down” of life that marked the good shepherd (see 10:11, 15, 17, 18), and the demand for a washing so that one can have part with Jesus (ἔχεις μέρος) recalls the baptismal practices by means of which the new Christian is drawn into the suffering, death, and resurrection of Jesus (13:8).16 _{Peter fails to understand (vv. 9–10b). Jesus closes this scene} with a prophecy about the future denials of Judas (vv. 10c–11). The passage opened with Jesus’ love and knowledge, including a reference to Judas that led to the action of the footwashing (vv. 1–5). But his gesture of self-gift in love and service is surrounded by Peter’s failure to understand (v. 9) and a further notice of Judas’ future betrayal (vv. 10c–11).

In verses 12–17 Jesus addresses this situation, asking that his disciples continue his knowledge, love, and action. Resuming his position at table, he asks if they “know” what he has done for them (v. 12). The pattern of teacher and lord kneeling in self-gift for his own must continue as one of the marks of the followers of Jesus. He has given them an example they must repeat in their lives of service, no matter what their role might be. The choice of the Greek word for “example” (ὑπόδειγμα) continues the theme of self-gift in love, even to death. The Greek expression, found only in John 13:15 in the New Testament, appears in some well-known Jewish texts that use it to

15. The Greek expression behind this translation can mean that the devil had put it into Judas’ mind or that the devil had made up his mind. The former is the majority position (see, for example, Koester, Word of Life, 77, and the recent commentaries of Schnelle, Lincoln, Keener, Zumstein, and Bruner, all in the bibliography of this book). Nevertheless, the latter meaning should be chosen; as yet Judas has not been taken over by Satan. See the supportive note of the expert in Hellenistic grammar Édouard Delebecque, Évangile de Jean: Text traduit et annoté, CahRB 23 (Paris: Gabalda, 1987), 183: “The Greek phrase demands this meaning.” In terms of the narrative, if Satan already controls Judas in v. 2, what is the point of Satan’s “entering” Judas in v. 27? See also Barrett, Gospel according to St. John, 439.

16. See Barrett, Gospel according to St. John, 441: “John has penetrated beneath the surface of baptism as an ecclesiastical rite, seen it in its relationship to the Lord’s death, into which