Lars Kierspel, «'Dematerializing' Religion: Reading John 2–4 as a Chiasm», Vol. 89 (2008) 526-554
After offering a critical analysis of Moloney’s synthetical parallelism for John 2–4, this article argues for a chiastic structure of the Cana-to-Cana cycle which directs the reader from the visible signs (2,1-12+4,43-54) and physical properties of religion (2,13-22+4,1-42) to Jesus as the metaphysical agent of
God’s salvation and judgment (3,1-21+3,22-36). The new 'dematerialized' faith thereby subverts expectations of material restoration and reorients the believing eye not towards a sanctuary but towards the Son.
“Dematerializing†Religion: Reading John 2–4 as a Chiasm 527
series of examples of faith†(3). Moloney lines up Jesus’ different
dialogues and miracles as Jewish (2,12–3,36) and non-Jewish (4,1-
42) journeys from “no faith†to “partial faith†and finally to
“complete faith†(4), framed by Mary and the official as another two
Jewish and Gentile examples of complete faith. Two comments are
interjected at the same place in both journeys, the first one by the
narrator, criticizing faith based on signs (2,23-25), and the second
one by Jesus commending the essential “work†of mission (4,31-38).
The movement of the text forms a “synthetic parallelism†(a, b, c / a1,
b2, c2) (5) that can be charted as follows:
Miracle in Cana: Complete faith in a Jewish context: example of the mother
of Jesus (2,1-11)
JEWS (2,12–3,36)
A No faith: Jews (2,12-22)
Comment: criticism of faith based on signs (2,23-25)
B Partial faith: Nicodemus (3,1-21)
C Complete faith: John the Baptist (3,22-36)
NON-JEWS (4,1-42)
A’ No faith: Samaritan woman 1 (4,1-15)
B’ Partial faith: Samaritan woman 2 (4,16-26)
Comment: recalling the essential ‘work’ (4,31-38)
C’ Complete faith: Samaritans (4,27-30.39-42)
Miracle in Cana: Complete faith in a non-Jewish context: example of the
official (4,43-54)
2. Evaluation of Moloney’s View
Although this innovative proposal is now thirty years old and
stems from one of the “premier Johannine authorities of our day†(6),
it has, to my knowledge, never been discussed in any detail. There is
nothing new in defining the textual unit by the inclusio of the two
miracles or in noticing the shift within John 2–4 from Jewish to non-
Jewish interlocutors (see discussion below). Yet where Moloney is
the most creative, in the postulate of two parallel journeys from “no
faith†to “complete faith†(2,12–3,36; 4,1-42), that’s where questions
arise.
(3) MOLONEY, “From Cana to Canaâ€, 202.
(4) Ibid., 200-201; The Gospel of John, 64-65.
(5) F.J. MOLONEY, Belief in the Word. Reading John 1-4 (Minneapolis, MN
1993) 199, n. 9.
(6) So P. ANDERSON in a review in RBL 12 (2006) on Moloney’s The Gospel of
John. Text and Context (Leuwen 2005).