Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Paul Ricoeur
The Journal of Religion, Vol. 64, No. 4, Norman Perrin, 1920-1976. (Oct., 1984), pp. 501-512.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-4189%28198410%2964%3A4%3C501%3AFPTN%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained
prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in
the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/journals/ucpress.html.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.
The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic
journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers,
and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take
advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
http://www.jstor.org
Fri Jun 22 07:44:23 2007
From Proclamation to Narrative
Paul R icoeur I Uniuersip of Chicago
I Norman Perrin, Rediscovering the Teaching ofJesur, New Testament Library (London: SCM
Press; New York: Harper & Row, 1967), pp. 11-12 (hereafter cited as Rediscovering). Apart from
the preface written for the paperback edition, the text and pagination are identical to the 1967
original.
o 1984 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. 0022-418918416404-0006$01.00
The Journal of Religion
U p to this point Bultmann and Jeremias are in agreement. Bult-
mann always affirmed that the Dass of the death on the Cross was the
historical minimum required by the Was of post-Easter faith. We see
why: kerygma must include Jesus' past in Christ's present, for if not, it
runs the risk of interpreting the latter in the gnostic sense or in that of a
Hellenistic myth.
The question is then whether the narrative development of this seed
in the form of a new literary mode, the Gospel, stems from the same
necessity or whether it expresses the contingency of a historical situa-
tion and even a dangerous deviation that would require, precisely, the
return to the kerygma possessing only the most impoverished narrative
component. It is in reply to this question that the paths diverge.
We must first listen to what Bultmann has to say: by referring to the
tradition about Jesus are we not setting ourselves the impossible task of
reconstructing a "life of Jesus"? Has not the history of redaction and
form criticism shown us that this understanding has already failed and
that it had to fail? Liberal theology, underestimating the strictly
exegetical obstacles to this enterprise, sought to treat the christologi-
cal interpretations as an added-on superstructure that could be
removed so that one could write a life of Jesus freed of every dogmatic
and ecclesiological prejudice. However, as Albert Schweitzer demon-
strated in his history of these lives of Jesus, in the final analysis each
one reflected the historian's own vision of the world or that of his epoch,
and so each was therefore paradoxically revealed to be just as theologi-
cally motivated as were the narratives it sought to replace.
We have to keep in mind this failure of the liberal attempts to write a
life of Jesus if we want to understand the Bultmannian school's reaction
and its excesses in the opposite direction. It was the very program of
the Leben-Jesus Forschung that was overturned by form criticism. Narra-
tivization, accordingly, appeared as a secondary phenomenon,
stemming from the influence of myths and legends on an essentially
nonnarrative kerygmatic base.
For Bultmann himself, this conclusion represented both a wholly
modern requirement of scientificalness and a much more traditional
and Lutheran one that faith should not be defended by works. The first
requirement led him to describe as vain any attempt to separate the
historical Jesus from the kerygmatic framework. The second persuaded
him that this was both useless and even dangerous. If, somehow, such
an effort should succeed, it would be the equivalent of substituting
carnal certitude for the decision of faith, hence of seeking salvation in
some human work rather than in faith understood as pure grace.
From Proclamation to Narrative
Along with this criterion of dissimilarity, Perrin adds that of coherence among what is
attributed to Jesus and that of multiple attestation in various documents, which need not all be
canonical (Rediscooering, pp. 15-49).
T h e Journal of Religion
Norman Perrin, Jesus and the Language of the Kingdom: Symbol and Metaphor in N e w Testament
Interpretation (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976).
See A. N. Whitehead, Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmolo~y,ed. D. R . Griffin and
D. W. Sherburne (New York: Free Press, 1978), esp. pp. 18, 187, 287ff.; and D. W. Sherburne,
A Key to Whitehead's Process and Reality (New York: Macmillan Publishing Co., 1966), pp. 6-9,
205-7.
From Proclamation to Narrative
There is no shortage of exegetical arguments to support this position, for example, that Jesus
interpreted his exorcisms as anticipations of the Kingdom. As Perrin puts it, "The saying interprets
the exorcismsn (Rediscovering, p. 65). They are meaningless apart from the interpretation that ties
them to the future Kingdom of God. Here is an example drawn from an eschatological saying,
Mark 2: 18ff. The authentic core of this saying, according to Jeremias, must have been, "Can the
wedding guests fast during the wedding?" (S. H . Hooker, trans., Parables of Jesur, rev. ed. [New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 19631, p. 52, n. 4 [cited in Perrin, Rediscovering, p , 79, n. 31).
This, in turn, suggests that there was something festive about the announcement of the King-
dom, in its present dimension. The same joyful tone comes across in the parables of the hidden
treasure and the pearl (Matt. 13:44-45). Why such joy? Because the forgiveness of sins is
announced, not just with certitude or generosity, but also with extravagance. Perrin says, "And
no doubt the extravagance is deliberaten (Rediscovering, p. 96). I have also developed the theme of
extravagance in my own study of the parables as narrative fictions. Here I am going directly to
what exegesis takes as the point of the parable, without regard for its literary form. Whether it be
a question of the parable of the lost sheep or the lost drachma, or the return of the prodigal son,
something happens that outstrips every expectation.
The Journal of Religion
6 H . Conzelmann, "Present and Future in the Synoptic Tradition," Journal for Theology and
Church 5 (1968): 26-44; reprinted in R . Funk, ed., God and Christ: Existence and Providence (New
York: Harper & Row; Tiibingen: J . C . B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1968), pp. 26-44; and appeared
originally as "Gegenwart und Zukunft in der synoptischen Traditionen," Zeitschr$ fur Theologie
und Kirche 54 (1957): 277-96.
7 Even in the parables of judgment such as the parables of the tares among the wheat (Matt.
13:24-30), the announced separating of the good and bad grain is referred to some undated
future, which excludes all speculation concerning the duration of the interval. Even when this
duration seems at issue, as in the parable of the talents, its length is not so much the issue as is its
use as an extended period of responsibility. As for the similes that seem to sanction speculation
about the signs (the strong man in Mark 3:27; the fig tree in Mark 13:28), they seem rather to put
the accent on the presence among us now of the future Kingdom. The same tie between present
and future existence may be seen in the parables of growth, without the question of the length of
time being appropriate. In short, there are no other signs than those given here and now. No
"picturen of the future makes sense any longer. Once again, this is because Jesus' existence and his
self-understanding are a part of the substance of what is signified in parables: "The interpretation
of the coming One and of the person of Jesus form a unityn (Conzelmann, p. 37). Rudolf
Bultmann, Conzelmann notes, was correct in saying that ' ~ e s u disregards
s time" if this disregard
is given a positive meaning, namely, that the signs that announce the Kingdom are present in the
person of Jesus.
0 Perrin does not hesitate to call the fourth chapter of Rediscovering "Jesus and the Future."
There he admits that "no part of the teaching ofJesus is more difficult to reconstruct and interpret
than that relating to the futuren (p. 154). In fact, the apocalyptic declarations about the Son of
man serve as a screen, and an enormous effort is required to scrape these away in order to reach
the authentic core. Perrin sees in these texts interpretations by the early Christian community
based on Dan. 7:13 and destined to support the theme of the parousia, Jesus returning as the Son
of man, or that of the resurrection, Jesus being raised to heaven as the Son of man, or that of the
crucifixion in liaison with Zech. 12: 10, which conjoins mourning (kopsomai) and vision (opsomai).
In the final analysis, the imagery of the Son of man belongs to the apologetics of the passion.
From Proclamation to Narrative
CONTROVERSY
12 Once again, the parables are being considered here not in terms of their individual contents,
ment of the foolish generosity of the householder, concealed beneath the paradox of a generous
caprice, questions us: "Are you jealous because I a m that good?" T h e same vindicating and
provocative intention may be discerned in the parable of the lost sheep (Luke 15:4-7; Matt.
18:12-14): such is God's joy when just one of the "little ones" is saved! And you, what do you say?
In the parable of the great supper (Matt. 22:l-10; Luke 14:16-24) the point concerns the relation
between the guests and the host: no one is a guest by right, it is suggested. Each person must
respond to an invitation that is put as a challenge. Curses on those who were invited first and
refused. O n the other hand, the unjust steward offers a shocking example of a cheat who, con-
fronted with a crisis, knows how to respond (Luke 16:l-8). The irony is strong and quite obvious
in a provocative way. T h e parable of the workers hired at the last hour is no less irritating. God
accepts some on the basis of their merits and others on the basis of a pardon (Matt. 20: 11-16).
Here again Jesus responds to an attack aimed as his conduct with a parable that says what God
does. Everything in the parables is a challenge: the joy of the entry of the heathens into the King-
dom at the eschatological hour (the parable of the great supper); the horror of the refusal of those
to whom the Kingdom will come as a catastrophe, unexpected as a burglar (Matt. 24:42-44),
From Proclamation to Narrative
devastating as the flood (Matt. 7:26-27); the patience in waiting for the moment of sorting (the
parable of the seine net [Matt. 13:47-501); the confidence that the "poorn will hear the good news
(Luke 14:7-21, 16:19-31); the expectation that the vineyard will be given to others (Mark 12:9
and parallels); and so on.
J . L. Austin, How to Do Things with Words, ed. J. 0 . Urmson (London: Oxford University
Press, 1962).
T h e Journal of Religion
fear and horror. The festive announcement turns into an arrest leading
to the death of the one who proclaimed it. Salvation is here among you,
he says. The time of the wedding has come. Yet to grasp the meaning
of this requires overcoming a mountain of hostility. It means under-
standing that preaching the joy of God can only engender scandal,
anger, even violence.