"In the first place," they insisted, "you shouldn't give the credit to anyone that we don't approve of. Credit belongs to God." The man who had been healed refused to enter the controversy. Theology wasn't the topic that concerned him at the moment. He, with some irony, asked why were they so concerned with the procedure that Jesus had used for healing, "Why do you want to know more about him? Are you considering becoming one of his followers?"
They responded negatively and huffily, "We know what true religion is like, and we don't know anything about this new guy."
"What else do you need to know?" he replied to their criticism. "He healed me. Only if he were from God, could that have happened." The religious authorities had had enough of arguing. They expelled the man.
In discussing this episode in her commentary on John, Written that You May Believe, Sharon Schneiders says:
The reader is, of course, supposed to identify with the man born blind. But do we, perhaps, but become sophisticated evaders when that confession has consequences for our reputation or job or safety? Even worse, are we religious authority figures whose first allegiance is to the institution and who are willing to suppress the prophets among us when their testimony to their experience calls that institution or our position within it into question?
No comments:
Post a Comment