作者：Johnston, Marcia Ellen 年份：1982
SOME SPECULATIONS ON THE PSYCHOLOGY OF ST. JOHN'S GOSPEL
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.
JESUS AND JOHN THE BAPTIST
The first character presented in John's Gospel is of course John the Baptist. He is known from the Synoptic Gospels as the cousin or relative of Christ. John is chiefly characterized in the Fourth Gospel by statements about what he is not. There is little personal contact indicated between Jesus and John. Only the baptismal scene in other versions indicates direct meetings. Despite the absence of direct dialogue, there is a relationship between the two men, if only in the interchange of their apostles. If Jesus was gifted with the spiritual knowledge of others, then John also had some power of knowledge with his divine mission. "His baptizing and preaching in the desert was opening up the hearts of men, leveling their pride, filling their emptiness and thus preparing them for God's intervention."(13) John's claim to identity is also interesting; he is by his own admission the 'Isaian voice in the wilderness', the one who takes the angelic role in preparing a way through the desert for the Israelites to return to Palestine. "John the Baptist is to prepare a road, not for God. God's people to return to the promised land, but for God to come to His people."(14) In the preparation John's basic ministry is a call to self-assessment, to personal honesty. How neatly this dovetails with the call of Jesus to 'come and see '. John's own integrity is shown in his denial of the prophetic or kingly roles that are wished on him and the maintenance of his secondary status to the 'one who is to come'. John's relationship with Jesus is heavily circumscribed the strict character with which the author of the Gospel sets him up: "The character in which the Baptist is to be presented is defined in advance by a statement in the Prologue (i. 6-8): the man named John, who was sent from God, (a) was not the Light, but (b) came to bear witness to the Light, (c) in order that through his agency all might become believers. This threefold schema controls subsequent sections dealing with the Baptist."(15)
It seems clear that, in the long term relationship of Jesus and John, with the possibility that they both had some connection with the Qumran community, and the strong possibility that Jesus had been an earlier follower of the Baptist, Jesus was able to 'know' John for who he was, while John was less sure of Jesus. The ability of Jesus to know in the divine sense as well as the human begins to emerge in his public ministry, after he left John and moved into his teaching ministry. John says twice, "And I myself never recognized him' (Jn. 1:31,33). His role in hindsight was the recognition of Jesus as a Jewish apocalyptic figure" raised up by God to destroy evil in the world."(16)
When Jesus began his teaching ministry, his behaviour no longer fitted the expected pattern for John, of the judgemental prophet or priestly king, and thus, from prison, John sends his disciples to question the change in direction.
"It is precisely that change in the way Jesus was conducting himself (a change that took place after John the Baptist was imprisoned) which led John the Baptist to send from prison to inquire if, after all, Jesus was really the one to come" (Lk. 7:20).(17) The relationship illustrates a strong point in the personal psychology of Jesus Christ－he rarely behaved in the way others expected him to. In the relationship with John, this misunderstanding, and John's persistence in clinging to his former patterns of expectation, caused a break in trust with Jesus. It also indicated a clinging to Christ, John giving all his own glory to the 'one who is to come' but somehow expecting that this figure would fit his own image, that he would have some control. When he found that he could not control the Messiah figure he had trouble dealing with the relationship.
"If John the Baptist actually did expect an Elijah-like figure we have at last the explanation of why he sent his disciples to see if Jesus really was the one to come－Jesus was not acting in the way John the Baptist expected! And Jesus answered him in terms of Isaiah: His was not the role of a destroying judge; but that of a gentle healer and preacher predicted by Is. 35:5-6 and 66:1."(18) Looking at the evidence from the Dead Sea scrolls, Dodd postulates that "it is by no means unlikely that the Baptist should have deliberately set himself to fill the role of the voice "If the man of Qumran believed themselves to have been called (or believed that they might in future be called, according to the interpretation adopted) to fill the role of the Voice in the Wilderness, so may John the Baptist have believed himself called, though his conception of the role went somewhat beyond the 'study of the law'."(19)
St. Paul, in a speech to Jews at Pisidian Antioch, states: "Before his coming John had preached a baptism for the repentence……and as John was finishing his course he said, what do you suppose I am? I am not he. No, but one is coming, the sandals of whose feet I am not worthy to untie."(20)
With the elaborate preconception of the 'glorious one' to come it may well have been difficult for John to recognize, or be reconciled with, the existence of Jesus. When he did, he seems to have gone to the furthest extreme in denying himself－in the bridegroom speech and other disclaimers. This suggests to me that he was never comfortable with the day to day reality of Jesus in visibly human form and activity.
13)Brown, Jn., 50.
14)Ibid.
15)Dodd, 248.
16)Brown, Jn., 60.
17)Id, 155.
18)Brown, N. T. E., 139.
19)Dodd, 253.
20)Acts 13:24-25.
THE HEALING STORIES
Moving from the first relationships outlined in the Gospel, we find the Cana cycle with its repetition of sign and Christ's emerging public ministry. The theology of the 'Cana to Cana' cycle plays an important part in the message of John's gospel. John places less emphasis on the miracle story per se to prevent the idea of Christ as a mere miracle work, a notion he suggests strongly was repugnant to Jesus himself. "It is on the meaning of the Johannine miracle that we must center our attention, and perhaps we can find a key to this in John's vocabulary. Although others (including the editor of the Gospel) refer to the Jesus' miracles as 'signs', Jesus himself consistently refers to them as 'works '."(21) Brown suggests that the Old Testament background for the notion refers to the work of God accomplished by creation and continuing throughout the salvation history. John specifically has Jesus sum up his ministry in 'work' terms:" "I glorified you on this earth by completeing the work you have given me to do'. Not only are Jesus's miracles works; His words are works too: ‘The words that, I say to you people are not spoken on my own; it is the Father, abiding in me, who performs the works’."(22)
If the notion of work is a direct reference to the miracles performed in the course of his public teaching ministry, the notion of faith is implied in the performance of the signs. In John's description of the healing / signs cycle, the faith of the one who wishes to be or is healed, is as important in the dialogue as the power of the healer. "In fact, several times Jesus attributes the salvation directly to the faith of the person healed. 'Your faith has healed you' (Luke 8:48, 17:19, 18:42) ".(23) The range of faith varies from complete trust and faith in Christ, to scepticism and later conversion. Jesus speaks harshly (Jn. 2:23-25; 4:48; 6:26) of the belief which comes in the more typically Johannine and less Synoptic cases, "where people come to believe in Jesus because of the signs."(24) "Evidently Jesus is not satisfied with having his miracles looked on as mere credential cards; He wants an understanding of what they reveal."(25)
On a psychological level, Jesus seems to seek the development of insight on the part of the healed. Faith implies acceptance, understanding and belief－a knowledge of who the healed 'really is' and who Jesus 'really is'. The growth of faith and insight moves through what Brown categorizes as the unsatisfactory stages in reaction to the signs: refusal to see the signs with any faith, such as Caiaphas; belief in the miracle-working power of Jesus alone, a magic-worker image which Jesus refuses to accept. The acceptable response is found in those who see what is meant by the signs and who are able to learn who Jesus is and what he will do, and thus completely believe in Him. The highest level of belief is found in those who believe without signs (Jn. 20:29).
In a counseling relationship similar levels of reaction are displayed. The growth of trust is often based on how much better the counselor can initially make the client feel－temporary relief of symptoms, which is often preceded by scepticism and disbelief. From the initial distrust, the healer in this case is able to concentrate on demonstrating his ability to be trustworthy. Those who are able after time to trust the counselor are enabled through trust to gain insight. The counselor is in a position gradually to introduce the client to areas of his behaviour or personality that are unknown to him, just as the client is gradually able to 'allow' the counselor to have access to more of the hidden self. Those who are able to understand and see themselves have developed insight and often the personal strength to change behaviour in a desired way. At the highest level of a counseling relationship the client will be able to accept the information of the counselor without having to 'test' the trust relationship continually.
Of course this is a very rough image of both Jesus' ministry and the counseling process, but the parallels in the 'healing stories' seem very clear. In each situation Jesus looks for a response from the 'one to be healed'.
The Cana cycle begins with the wedding at Cana, which shows a small scene in the relationship of Mary and Jesus. Although the scene has been interpreted as a denunciation of Mary, Brown argues that this is misleading. Instead Mary plays a definite and honored role in her association with the disciples, and her request initiates Jesus' public ministry of signs. His refusal directly to accede to her request makes it clear that he is not there to act on her behalf or the will of others but only to answer the will of his Father. Mary, on the other hand, shows her complete belief in her son by asking the impossible and even in rejection persisting in her acceptance of what Jesus is capable of doing. It is as if she is saying－Look, this is what this man my son is, nothing is closed to him. Other characters in the miracle cycle show similar persistence in the face of the initial rejection, and Jesus responds. By the end of the Cana sign we have been introduced to what John wants us to know: that at this wedding Jesus first reveals his glory and "his disciples believed in him."(26)
With that focus Jesus shows great insight in dealing with his mother: the sign is obliquely at his mother's request, and he honors her presence, a presence he knows will no be possible from that point on. It seems to be a natural breaking point in their relationship and yet by publicly including her in the scene and act of his first sign he also pays respect to her role in the preparation of his ministry.
The Nicodemus scene continues the healing cycle, and begins John's use of the dialogue as a form of learning. Questions on one level are answered on another. "The lactic of the Johannine dialogue is always for the answer to transpose the topic to a higher level; the questioner is on the level of the sensible, but he must be raised to the level of the spiritual."(27)
Jesus responds in the Nicodemus dialogue in such a way as to present a challenge to the man himself－a point of asking / challenging growth. Brown points out the answers of Christ were not that oblique; while Nicodemus might have had some confusion about the role of the Spirit, he should have been able to understand some of the material from his Old Testament background. A second point brought out implicitly with the dialogue was the inability of 'knowledge' to prove the correct response to Christ. Indeed in the parallel to the counseling progress, 'knowledge' can prove an obstacle to growth, what we freely 'acknowledge' about ourselves can be superficial and masking of what is the real state. Nicodemus hid behind his mask－the role of an educated man, refusing to allow his own lack of knowledge in an inner sense, and it was this role that Christ challenged. As long as the belief was with the conscious mind and not from the deep emotional level of the personality, it was not effective in change.
21)Brown, N.T.E., 180f.
22)Id, 181.
23)Id, 179.
24)Id, 183f.
25)Id, 184.
26)Brown, Jn., 103.
27)Id, 138.
SAMARITAN WOMAN
The interchange with the Samaritan woman at the well illustrates the Johannine dialogue in use with a different social stratum. Nicodemus is eminently respectable, the Samaritan woman is not. "If we analyze the repartee at the well, we find quite true-to-life the characterization of the woman as mincing and coy, with a certain light grace."(28) She fails to appreciate his gesture in conversing with her－outside the normal custom. It is suggested by Roustang that the woman is mocking Christ in the first exchanges about water. Certainly she is not expecting serious consideration from this man who is a Jew and Rabbi. The dialogue shows rising clarification: Jesus asks for water, the woman fails to understand, he clarifies, she asks about the clarification－an indication of 'buying the answer'－and takes the initiative in demonstrating that he can see her. He points out his knowledge of her, mirrors her for herself. The woman tries to evade the knowledge Christ has put in front of her but Jesus again uses her answer to show her who she is.
The entire scene shows the progressive relationship of the healer and the healed: before Jesus can bring her to healing in her life she must see, as he does, who she is. The flirtation, the evasion and twisting of the truth would be characteristic of a normal counseling relationship especially in the case of the hysteric personality. The woman seeks to manipulate Jesus, that being the only pattern with which she is familiar. Under the pattern lies the lack of acceptance, which has marred her life and prevented trust and the building of permanent relationships. Jesus not only responds, indeed, initiates the contact, but also demonstrates that he knows who she is and is still willing to accept her. "We heard in iii 19-21 that those whose deeds are evil do not come near the light lest their deeds be exposed. The dialogue in 16-18 constitutes the crucial moment of judgement: will she turn her back on the light?"(29)
Judgement is not really the best description of what is happening in this scene. Reality modeling is a closer description; Christ will not allow her to play games or evade the truth about who she is. The turning point in the healing process must be her acceptance of this reality, and her realization that he is willing to accept her despite her desperate manipulation because he sees what lies beyond the role. In verses 19-20 we have the situation where the woman sees the 'light' and in 21-24 Jesus explains "that true worship can come only from those begotten by the Spirit of truth. Only through the Spirit does the Father beget true worshipers."(30) In verses 25-26 the woman finally recognizes who Jesus is and Jesus affirms it; and implicit in this fact is that she recognizes who she is, and that He also affirms it－one without the other is difficult. She must know who she is in order really to 'see' him clearly. Brown comments: "In this scene John has given us the dramma of a soul struggling to rise from the things of this world to belief in Jesus ". (31)He has also given us the basics of a psychological dramma. When she calls Jesus a prophet, her identification of him" stems from the special knowledge that he has exhibited, but may also refer to his obvious wish to reform her life."(32) The insight Christ shows in seeing what her real needs are, and his tolerance for her behaviour again mirrors his ability to 'see' the person beyond normal perceptiveness.
28)Id, 175, citing M.J. Lagrange, Evangile selon S. Jean (8th ed; Paris, Gabalda, 1948), 101. The following reference to Roustang is taken from Brown, Jn., 177.
29)Id, 177.
30)Ibid.
31)Id, 178.
32)Id, 171.
OFFICIAL'S SON
The sign of the cure of the official's son deals with a more physical reality of Christ's ministry. Many of the same elements are however present in this scene. There is a question of trust or faith at the center of the scene; "the man put his trust in the word Jesus had spoken to him and started for home." (Jn. 4:50b). Jesus comments that only by seeing will people believe; and, interpreted on the double level John is often intending, the question of seeing can go beyond physical sight and mean the development of insight into who Jesus is, and what the relationship between Christ and man must be. Of course this is a passage concerning the power Jesus has over death and life, and coming to believe in Christ who is the eternal word / life, but it is also a passage about trust, and man's basic fear of trusting that which is not visible.
Fearing risk is common both in these passages and in any counseling relationship. In spiritual or psychological counselling that person must take the initial risk of accepting the unknown, and this is often the greatest obstacle to growth. Jesus models risk taking and calls for it in his relationships with others.
BETHESDA CRIPPLE
"The general pattern or form of the Bethesda story, like that of several pericopae in the Synoptic Gospels……, is determined by a feature common to them all: that Jesus takes action on his own initiative, without any appeal either from the patient or from his friends."(33) Common to the healing stories is the challenge of Jesus to the sick man, '"Do you really want to become a healthy man?' 'Have you the will to health?' The man's reply is a feeble excuse, which shows that his will to health has been weak. In view of this, the further command, 'Rise, pick up your stretcher and walk!' is felt as a further challenge to the man's enfeebled will, and, in fact, as a demand for his co-operation in the cure."(34)
Once again Jesus deals with the reality of the man's personality: if he does not have the will to be healthy, then he will be unable to accept the cure. The healing process indicated by Christ in this scene is two-fold; the healing power of the Spirit and the acceptance of the healing by the will of the patient, the desire to be healthy. The psychological parallels are so obvious it would be redundant to mention them. One is not cured, one becomes well; and this becoming involves the will to accept, grow, change and live. The responsibility for change belongs to the sick person. Jesus challenges the man to take up his own life and be responsible for it. He also challenges the man not to return to his former behaviour, 'sin no more', recognizing the psychological dimensions of the weak will which made him ill. Christ makes a distinction in the opening lines of the scene between sin and suffering, yet he recognizes the role that the self has had in the cause of the illness. The grumbling character of the sick man illustrates this: "If the paralytic's malady were not so tragic, one could almost be amused by the man's unimaginative approach to the curative waters. He crotchety grumbling……betrays a chronic inability to seize opportunity, a trait reflected again in his oblique response to Jesus' offer of a cure."(35)
THE ADULTRESS
The psychology of the adultress scene in Chapter Eight is similar to the dialogue with the Samaritan woman. Both deal with women of a socially unacceptable class, who are considered guilty of social crimes. Jesus laid down some clear reactions to guilt, both the guilt of the society which causes the women to be ostacised and the guilt of the individual. He proved unshockable, he did not recoil in horror from the woman; he refused to join them in their guilt trip, and he made a clear statement－that the truth of the woman's sin was more acceptable than the hypocrisy of the accusers. Finally he accepted, acknowledged what she had done, but made it clear that he was concerned only with her present and future behaviour.
The writing in the sand is debated, but the majority opinion suggests that he wrote from the Old Testament texts dealing with scandal. The "adultery in Law was concerned with unfaithfulness on the part of a wife, and not with affairs between husbands and unmarried women."(36) Christ indicated the double standard of the accusers. In this scene we are shown "the delicate balance between the justice of Jesus in not condoning the sin and his mercy in forgiving the sinner"; it is "one of the great gospel lessons".(37) It is perhaps the power of Christ's acceptance that enables the woman to stop.
An example of the 'acceptance' of Jesus is found in the discourse in 8:25-26: "What I have been telling you from the beginning. Many are the things I could say about you and condemn; but the only things I say to this world are what I have heard from Him, the One who sent me, who is truthful".
33)Dodd, 174.
34)Id, 176.
35)Brown, Jn., 209.
36)Id, 333.
37)Id, 337.
THE BLIND MAN
In Chapter Nine, the blind man episode deals with the 'seeing of the Light', In this case, the physical blindness of the man is not a bar to his insight: he is better able to see and appreciate Jesus than the blindness of faith on the part of the Sadducees. "The encounter is a casual one…… As at Bethesda and at Nain, Jesus 'saw' the sufferer. But on the present occasion the 'seeing' does not at once lead to active intervention, which waits on the initiative of a third party: the disciples draw their Master's attention to the blind man."(38)
In contrast with other healing stories, the healing of the blind man is not immediate. "In our present passage, on the other hand, after the operation with spittle, the patient is bidden, 'Go wash in the pool of Siloam'. He goes, carries out his instructions, and emerges with the power of sight. This gives a different aspect to the story: the co-operation of the patient is demanded. His readiness to obey the command of Jesus is an essential element in the cure, and is in fact a measure of his faith, though John does not use the term."(39)
It is also a very directive statement on the part of Jesus. While he normally leads or acts on behalf of others, here he directs the man to effect his own cure. Obviously the character of the blind man is completely different from the paralytic of Bethesda or the women of the earlier encounters. Here is a man who needs only guidance and direction, and Jesus recognizes this.
It is also a comment on the vulnerability of the human condition, to be in a life where for the most part man walks blindly, with only the trust of others as a guide. Christ offers his guidance. Only by trusting can the man accept the offer and participate in his own cure. True, this is a very allegorical way of seeing the story; but much of John's scenerio is built around Jesus the light and my interpretation extends only into the psychogical level, dealing with the inability of people to see themselves clearly.
Other stories in the Synoptic gospels, (the story of the paralytic in Mark, the man with the withered arm, the lepers in Luke) show similar scenes with the faith of the sick person operative in the cure. In a counseling situation faith in God begins with trust in the source person. Jesus was able to inspire trust in most of the men and women he touched.
Jesus makes several comments in the blind man scenario about the nature of blindness and his own role, which again give clues to the personal psychology of the human Jesus. 'I came into the world for judgement; that those who do not see may be able to see and those who do see may become blind' (9:30). That he is talking about vengeance is nonsense, he is talking about ignorance, and free will. This is more evident in 9:41: 'If only you were blind then you would not be guilty of sin, but now that you claim to see, your sin remains.' This seems to refer to the responsibility of insight: once you are able to see your own behaviour, just as once you are able to see Christ, then the rejection of both goods becomes self-condemnation. In making the blind man able to see, Jesus is also freeing him to become responsible for his life, with the possibility of choosing the rejection of the good as well as to follow it in Jesus. He will no longer be attached to the sin, or behaviour of his parents, but become a person in his own right. Perhaps this is why Jesus does not initially rush to cure him. Brown comments that "the care with which the evangelist has drawn his portraits of increasing insight and hardening blindness is masterful". (40)
THE LAZARUS STORY
Finally we come to the dramatic climax of the healing stories, leading to Jesus' own death. He has been revealed as the Wisdom, and the Light, and the Life of the world, now he demonstrates that he is indeed physical life for others. Jesus resurrects his dead friend Lazarus from the tomb. "There is much dramatic or picturesque detail. There is, once again, the delay, allowing the illness of the patient to reach a fatal conclusion, and this leads, after much dialogue of a peculiarly Johannine cast, to the theme of death as sleep (xi. 11-14). Then we have, in highly dramatic vein, the journey of Jesus, his arrival four days too late (as it seems), his meeting with the sisters……the scene of mourning, in which Jesus is constrained to join."(41) There are also strong elements of response on the part of Jesus, of emotional reactions, and some revealing moments showing his relationship with his friends, Lazarus, Martha and Mary.
The scene is "unique in this gospel for the way in which it combines narrative and discourse in an inseparable whole".(42) It is the longest continuous dramatic narrative in the Gospel, and has very distinct characterization. It is unique in showing some of the personal life Jesus had with this family in Bethany. "There is frequent emphasis on the love that Jesus has for the family. If Bethany was Jesus' lodging place when he came to Jerusalem……then it is not too unreasonable to suggest that it was at this home that he stayed and that its occupants were truly his close friends."(43)
In this scene, as throughout the Gospel, it is clear that Jesus had a very personal and individual relationship with each of the three friends, as well as the normal social relationship. Like Mary, his mother, at Cana (Jn. 2:5), they felt able to turn to him confidently when Lazarus fell ill. In each case, there is the same half-expressed hope that Jesus will act despite the seeming impossibility of the situation".(44) Although it does not mention that Lazarus petitioned his Master, it can be assumed that he too hoped that Jesus would come to heal him. There is ample evidence that Jesus knew of the sickness: vs. 4, 11, 13, 14; and yet he did not respond in the way the sisters expected. As at the Cana wedding scene Jesus is not manipulated, he cannot allow them to control his action, although he expresses concern. Bultmann claims that "Jesus' works have their own hour." Certainly in the Lazarus story this is true－"Out of love Jesus did not go to help the sick Lazarus, for he would be of more help to Lazarus when Lazarus was dead."(45)
I do not think that Jesus would test them just to see to what extent their belief would hold. Instead the focus could be on the other side of trust－to believe freely even when the concrete support is missing, a centered faith that sustains the relationship with love, even when the loved one behaves in a way outside our expectations. Jesus was himself, he was responsive to the will of his Father, and responded with compassion to the need of the three in Bethany, knowing that he did not need to let them dictate his actions. If they were in fact his close friends, then the relationship did not need him to act. He loved them enough to know that they would accept who he was and what he did.
When he finally went to Bethany and came at that time of the funeral scene, he was met by the two sisters－Martha, who "throughput the incident……believes in Jesus but inadequately" and who indicates, 11:39, “that she does not as yet believe in his power to give life”(46) and Mary who again affirms that she believes and accepts Christ.
The emotional outburst from Jesus indicates that the scene is really a point where, not only in the spiritual sense but in a real human psychological sense, Jesus is free to show these friends who he is. The spiritual concepts of glorification and belief are on another level the expression of real love and trust. He demonstrates his trust in their belief by accepting the hard situation, not responding to Lazarus immediately, and yet expressing his own real pain at Lazarus's death. Facing the tomb of Lazarus also calls out of Jesus his pain at his own approaching death and he feels free to share that with these his friends.
The interchange with Martha is one where she demonstrates what she thinks she knows of Jesus and he affirms for her what he really is. "As usual with the 'I am' statements which have a predicate, the predicates 'resurrection' and 'life' describe what Jesus is in relation to men－they are what Jesus offers to men."(47)
In that context the openess with which Jesus comes to Martha and Mary is truly the offering of his love to them, that here at this time he will be himself with them. It is as himself, the very real expression of who he is, that he raises Lazarus from the tomb, from death and from the darkness that death represents. And in doing so he must face his own death, and perhaps his own fears of death.
The model for the counseling relationship is clear. The healer must be truly free to be him / herself and to affirm that identity with the client. Secondly, to reach the pain and disorder of the client, requires empathy－to go to that place－and the facing of one's own personal darkness. Jesus goes beyond what might be expected to be with Lazarus all the way even to death.
After dealing with the relationship of Jesus with the family in Bethany, we move to the anointing scene. It shows many of the same elements, in the close portrayal of friendship between Mary and Jesus. If, as it is sometimes suggested, Mary was also the Magdalen, brought back into society through Jesus, then the portrayal of this scene has an even deeper meaning. Mary's caring for Jesus is obvious, she listens to him, she embraces his feet in the Lazarus scenario, she is there for him. In the context of a loving relationship that is only hinted at, she is clearly a person close to Christ. Finally in this scene she anoints him, and as with his mother in the Cana scene, her presence and action take on prophetic overtones. Benoit separates the scene into two incidents, one, involving a sinner woman who anoints Jesus' feet with her tears, as in the Lucan drama; and the second involving a close friend of Jesus who anoints Jesus with her best perfume on his head. Whichever version is accepted, the evidence of three accounts, Mark, Matthew and John, plus the Lucan version certainly support the fact that Jesus was lovingly anointed by a woman and not only accepted the anointing but rebuked those who thought it unseemly.
I find the action of Mary a real and understandable expression of love, made in a way that forced her beyond the 'reasonable' limits of social expression of her time. She took a risk because she loved Jesus enough to risk showing it. The greater risk would have been to keep silent and do nothing. The fact that it was a physical action suggests that she was symbolically saying what she could not express verbally, and doing something that was a frightening and intense expression of her feelings. It is Jesus’ acceptance of the love that frees her; not to have it demanded that the love be returned in kind, Jesus has made it clear earlier that he cannot be held by human relationships, and yet, by his acceptance of Mary's acts, he makes his love for her clear. By demonstrating that he understands what this is for her, he affirms her and offers her himself. Much is made of the action: "Mary's action constituted an anointing of Jesus's body for burial, and thus unconsciously she performed a prophetic action," (48) but I think it is this emotional climate which is the center of the scene. Jesus gives Mary permission to be herself, to love, and to express the love, and to have the love accepted. The model for Christian relationships is clear.
38)Dodd, 181.
39)Id, 183.
40)Brown, Jn., 377.
41)Dodd, 231.
42)Id, 228.
43)Brown, Jn., 431.
44)Id, 433.
45)Id, 431; ibid. for the reference to R. Bultmann, Das Evangelium des Johannes, 303.
46)Id, 433.
47)Id, 434.
48)Id. 454.