Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom by Norman Perrin
Chapter 3: The Modern Interpretation of the Parables of Jesus
B. THE "NEW HERMENEUTIC" AND THE PARABLES OF JESUS
2. Eta Linnemann: Jesus of the Parables
so recognizes him as of equal status. He puts the question to him, as was then customary to test a strange Rabbi’s knowledge. . .The road from high-lying Jerusalem to Jericho down the Jordan valley leads through an
uninhabited rocky wilderness and is notorious even to this day for attacks by robbers. . . Priest and Levite go by without bothering about the victim. . . . What matters is the contrast between the attitude of these cult officials and that of the Samaritan. . . It was, however, surprising and offensive for Jesus’ hearers that it should be a Samaritan that was given the role of the merciful man. . . .
Linnemann continues in this vein through the story; then she gives her interpretation of the parable as a whole, which we will quote at length.
Jesus uses the story of the good Samaritan to bring the question of the neighbour to the right place . . . he calls man forth from the place where he views the world simply as one that is basically controlled by a law that is as complete as possible, and on to the movement of authentic living.
The story certainly leaves no doubt that what really matters is to act as the Samaritan did; and our conscience says a clear "yes" to this. . . [We must] let ourselves be governed completely by the need of the man who confronts us. And that is not a thing that can be "done." As soon as we let ourselves be called out of the shell we have made of the world into the unprotected life of real encounter, we shall unquestionably make the discovery that we are exposed to the possibility of failing in life, in fact are always doing so already. Then the question about our lives makes us realize that we can no longer ourselves provide the answer to it. . . . Perhaps one must say that only when this question of our lives finds an answer does life truly continue in real encounter, and that in Christian preaching what is at stake is precisely the answer to this question.66 This is interesting as an example of the kind of interpretation demanded by the "new hermeneutic" and its understanding of the parables as
"language event." Linnemann had defined this as requiring that the language-event character of the parable in the situation of Jesus and his hearers should be made intelligible, so that it might then be repeated in Christian preaching. She now follows this hermeneutical process in the case of this parable by speaking of Jesus’ using the story to "call man forth" from "inauthentic existence" and on to "authentic living," and by
speaking of Christian preaching wherein we find the "real encounters"
which provide the answer to the "question of our lives."
Linnemann follows this same hermeneutical process in the case of the other parables, although she is usually not so concerned with the
possibility of repeating the language event in Christian preaching as she is in the case of The Good Samaritan. In The Pharisee and the Tax- collector, Luke 18:9-14, Jesus’ verdict, "I say to you, this man went down to his house as a righteous man, not that one,"67 reflects Jesus’
own decision to "stake all on" the grace of God, a decision reflected in his preparedness to hold table-fellowship with tax-collectors and sinners. "Jesus wants to win the agreement of his listeners for his
decision. . .but they can allow Jesus to be right only if they go through a radical conversion." In The Lost Sheep and The Lost Coin Jesus tells his contemporaries that repentance is "an event coming from God, the
arrival of his Kingdom," and that "here and now in these objectionable table companions this deed of God has happened. . . . To come to agree with Jesus his listeners had to alter their ideas radically." The Prodigal Son also has reference to Jesus’ table-fellowship with tax-collectors and sinners. "The reproach brought by the Pharisees was, ‘How can you celebrate with such people?’ Jesus’ answer runs, ‘The lost is found. This must be celebrated. I am joining in celebrating God’s feast. And what are you doing?’" "Jesus’ action turns the world upside down, because it disturbs its orders. . ." The Laborers in the Vineyard is directed to a situation in which "Jesus stands before his listeners as one who disturbs God’s order," and the story is intended to convince the listeners that they are in fact protesting against an "appearance of goodness," that is, against a manifestation of goodness, against "an epiphany, an
appearance of God." The parable "connects the appearance of goodness with the Kingdom of God, which is now arriving." The Great Supper is Jesus’ response to the expectation of the Kingdom of God, under the imagery of a banquet, as an event in the future, and it is concerned to show "that the meal has already begun." The Kingdom is present opportunity for those who respond, just as we are challenged "to have faith in the Gospel which invites to God’s feast now, and to act
accordingly." The Hid Treasure and The Pearl of Great Price together present "the unique opportunity"; they show Jesus challenging his hearers, not simply to wait "until the nearness of God had become visible in the reversal of the whole of life . . . [but] to take seriously this nearness of God here and now."68
In general it must be admitted that Linnemann’s interpretations of the
parables are not so striking, or so convincing, as her theoretical discussion leads one to expect. The interest in the "language-event"
character of the parables is certainly justifiable, and it is an interesting insight to think of hermeneutics in terms of making intelligible the parable as language event in the situation of Jesus and his hearers, and then, further, in terms of repeating the parable as language event under certain subsequent conditions. In the interpretation of The Good
Samaritan this hermeneutical process shows promise, but the
interpretation of the other parables does not live up to this promise. In practice Linnemann has advanced over Jeremias only in stressing the
"event" character of the things from the ministry of Jesus that she finds reflected in the parables, or toward which she sees the parables as
directed; and Jeremias would be happy, I am sure, to support her in most of what she has said. Apart from stressing the "event" character of
repentance, or the table-fellowship with tax-collectors and sinners, Linnemann moves the discussion forward in her appreciation of the extremely radical thrust of the parables. In speaking of Jesus’
demanding that his listeners "alter their ideas radically," or of his turning
"the world upside down," or of him as "one who disturbs God’s order,"
she is sounding a note that is being heard a great deal in the current American discussion, especially from Dominic Crossan. But in general her interpretation in practice does not live up to its promise in theory, and there is good reason for this: Linnemann has not paid sufficient attention to the literary-critical element in the hermeneutical process.
But this is a problem she inherited from her teacher, so we will take it up below, when we comment critically on "the new hermeneutic and the parables of Jesus." Next, however, we turn to the second pupil of Ernst Fuchs to address himself to the parables, Eberhard Jungel.