Social World, = Social Location, and Social Discourse in Luke-Acts:

Text, Culture, and Ideology in = Luke 7:1-10:=20 A Dialogic Reading

David B. Gowler

Pierce Professor of Religion

Oxford = College of Emory University

=93Truth is not=20 born nor is it to be found inside the head of an individual person, it = is born=20 between people collectively searching for truth, in the process of their = dialogic interaction.=94 =96 Mikhail Bakhtin[1]

=93Should I=20 pretend that I do not hear the voices and see the plights of the = =91little people=92=20 who cry out in biblical texts . . . ? Just what are some of us white = male=20 Protestants supposed to do when we hear the voices, sight the boundaries = and see=20 both the plights of the people on the margins and the flaws of people at = the=20 center of the New Testament texts we read?=94 =96 Vernon K. Robbins[2]

=93. . . we can=20 develop approaches that celebrate dialogue, that show interplays of = closure and=20 openness, and that encourage us to announce our agendas in public forum = and to=20 listen as people show us the implications, limitations, and biases of = those=20 agendas.=94 =96 Vernon K. Robbins[3]

I am delighted = to=20 contribute this essay in honor of Vernon Robbins. I have followed his = work since=20 the spring of 1979. At = the time, I=20 was a chemical engineering major at the University of Illinois, and I = enrolled=20 in a New Testament class taught by Robbins. I learned much in that = class, but=20 perhaps the most important element of what I learned was how to begin to = ask=20 different questions about these texts, the historical Jesus, and early=20 Christianity. Indeed, = that is an=20 essential element of the genius of socio-rhetorical interpretation: It = enables=20 us to ask different and more relevant questions in our dialogues with = these=20 texts, with each other, and with ourselves. And, it seems to me, that = Vernon=20 Robbins epitomizes that open, dialogic character in his own life and = work. It is=20 in that same spirit, and with many thanks for his contributions to the=20 discipline in general and to my work in particular, that I contribute = this=20 essay.

Robbins moved = to Emory=20 University, and it was over eleven years before our paths = (inadvertently)=20 crossed again. After a brief stint as a chemist, I entered graduate = school and=20 continued my New Testament studies. My initial scholarly publications = during the=20 late 1980=92s and early 1990=92s contained an integration of literary = and cultural=20 anthropological analyses that I called =93socio-narratological = criticism.=94[4]=20 My doctoral supervisor, Alan Culpepper, selected Robbins in the spring = of 1989=20 as the external reviewer for my dissertation. Robbins read the = manuscript and=20 invited it to be published as volume one of the series Emory Studies in Early = Christianity.[5]=20 In his review of my dissertation, Robbins noted that he was also working = at a=20 similar methodological integration and sent me his 1991 article: =93The = Social=20 Location of the Implied Author in Luke-Acts.=94[6]=20

My essay in = this volume is=20 in honor of that (re)connection with Robbins, because I extend = Robbins=92s=20 literary, social and cultural, and ideological insights in that 1991 = article and=20 focus specifically on the portrayal of the centurion in Luke 7:1-10. In=20 addition, I will build on Robbins=92s insight that ideology plays a = critical role=20 in the construction and interpretation of texts[7]=20 and will utilize aspects of Robbins=92s rubric of =93textures=94[8]=20 to explore the dialogues between text, culture, and ideology in Luke = 7:1-10.

Prelude: Dialogues between Literary and Social = Analysis in=20 Robbins=92s Work

Robbins=92s use = of literary=20 modes of analysis in his socio-rhetorical interpretation became much = more=20 explicit in the late 1980=92s,[9]=20 most notably in his provocative and creative merger of literary and = social forms=20 of analysis in =93The Social Location of the Implied Author of = Luke-Acts.=94[10] = For Robbins, a =93social location=94 is a position in a social system = that reflects=20 a worldview: =93a perception of how things work, what is real, where = things=20 belong, and how they fit together (306).[11] = Since language signifies social functions, it is constitutive of social=20 communication whose intratextual functions presuppose extratextual = systems of=20 social interaction. Every text is a socially symbolic act and assumes = certain=20 social and cultural norms.[12] = Or, as Mikhail Bakhtin notes, =93the situation enters into the utterance = as a=20 necessary constitutive element of its semantic structure.[13] = Thus Robbins believes that language is produced out of social = interaction among=20 people; there is not simply a speaker/writer; speaking/writing = presupposes the=20 presence (real or assumed) of a hearer/reader. From a Bakhtinian = perspective,=20 this means that the author/speaker=92s orientation toward the = reader/hearer is an=20 orientation toward a specific conceptual horizon. The dialogue between = the=20 conceptual world(s) of the author/speaker and the reader/hearer = establishes a=20 series of complex interrelationships, consonances, and dissonances, and=20 therefore enriches it with new elements. So discourse is oriented toward = the=20 person(s) addressed; it is oriented to what that person(s) is. The=20 author/speaker strives to get a reading/hearing of his/her word and the=20 conceptual system that helps to determine his/her word. In doing so the=20 author/speaker must be oriented toward the conceptual horizon of the=20 reader/hearer, enters into a dialogical relationship with certain = elements of=20 the (real or assumed) readers/hearers, and in this way various points of = view,=20 conceptual horizons, and social =93languages=94 interact with each = other.[14] = In a similar dialogic fashion, Robbins=92s socio-rhetorical = interpretation always=20 includes an analysis of the interrelations among the author, the text, = and the=20 reader. So interpreters must recognize the historical, social, cultural, = and=20 ideological relations among people and the texts they read and write.[15]

At this stage = (1991)=20 Robbins=92s =93narrative discourse model=94 had not yet reached the = sophistication of=20 his approach in Tapestry.[16] = In this essay Robbins explores aspects of the =93implied author,=94 the = =93singular=20 consciousness which the reader constructs from the words of the text . . = . the=20 static overarching view of a text that a reader might develop from = multiple=20 readings=94 (311). As Robbins notes elsewhere, words in texts = =93imply=94 authors, and=20 the =93implied author=94 is the kind of author that a reader constructs = on the basis=20 of the words in a text.[17] =

Robbins then = identifies=20 nine =93arenas of the social system=94[18] = and explores aspects of the implied author=92s social location through = brief=20 examinations of each arena. Several of these arenas are fruitful for a = reading=20 of Luke 7:1-10. Luke-Acts, for example, uses =93previous events=94 as a = means of=20 establishing and maintaining sets of relationships among various kinds = of=20 Christians, Jews, and Romans (331).[19] = Aspects of the =93Technology=94 arena indicate that the implied author = is perhaps=20 best described as =93technical writer,=94 a social location that reveals = an=20 appreciation for the work of people in the artisan class=97unlike the = disdain held=20 for such work by members of the elite (319). So the social location of = the=20 implied author is near the artisan class, not among the elite or = peasants. In=20 the arena of =93Socialization and Personality,=94 Robbins argues that = the social=20 location of the implied author is one where the implied author finds it=20 advantageous to seek to communicate with person(s) of some prestige in = Roman=20 society (=93Most excellent Theophilus=94) and adopts a (slightly lower) = subordinate=20 stance of respect in relation to those of some prestige (322). The = communication=20 is thus upward rather than downward to peasants (323). In that light, = the=20 implied author finds it important to place Jesus within the social = sphere of=20 reading culture=97reading literacy within Jewish culture (325; Lk = 4:16-22). Yet=20 the implied author also wants to portray a bicultural stance=97grounded = in Jewish=20 culture but competent in Greco-Roman culture. So the arena of =93Foreign = Affairs=94=20 indicates that the implied author wants the =93foreign affairs=94 (of = Christianity)=20 to find an accepted place within the affairs of Rome (326-327). Central = to this=20 emphasis is the implied author=92s basic ideology that God ordained a = place for=20 the =93foreign affairs=94 of Christianity within the affairs of the = Roman Empire.=20 Here Robbins begins to understand=97what most others have missed=97that = Luke-Acts=20 has a more aggressive ideological stance than just merely being an = =93apologia=94=20 for Christianity that seeks to demonstrate that Christians are not = guilty of=20 illegal activity. The implied author is indeed so confident in God=92s = action that=20 the text reflects a social location in which Christians are equal with=20 Pharisees, have confidence in relating with the leaders of the Roman = Empire, and=20 they seek their (rightful, in their view) home within that empire (see=20 below).

This leads to = the final=20 social arena, that of the Political-Military-Legal System. A number of = the=20 upper-level representatives of the Emperor appear. Most of these=20 officials=97whether prefect, proconsul, or king=97take no legal action = against=20 individual Christians (even Pilate stresses the innocence of Jesus), but = =93most=20 exhibit some social distance from Christianity=94 (329). More important = for Luke=20 7:1-10, however, is the portrayal of centurions in Luke-Acts. They are = favorably=20 related to Jesus and the later apostles; Robbins postulates that = Luke-Acts was=20 produced in a social location where a number of centurions are members = of the=20 Christian community (Lk 7:1-10; 23:47; Acts 10:1 =96 11:18; Acts 27:3, = 42-43).[20] = For the implied author, Christianity has a =93comfortable place within = the Roman=20 political-military-legal system, albeit with a deep uneasiness over this = =93at=20 homeness=94 (there is also a social location of =93imprisonment=94 = especially in Acts;=20 330).

Robbins = furthers these=20 insights in his essay, =93Luke-Acts: A Mixed Population seeks a Home in = the Roman=20 Empire=94 (cited above). In this article, Robbins=92s underlying thesis = is that=20 Luke-Acts is a narrative map grounded in an ideology that presents an = aggressive=20 =93strategy of territoriality=94 (202). The narrative=92s strategy is to = support=20 Christians who were building alliances with local leaders throughout the = eastern=20 Roman Empire. The narrator assumes that this region of the empire is an=20 appropriate =93workplace=94 for the emissaries of God. Christianity = functions in the=20 domain of the Roman Empire, works symbiotically with it, and Roman law, = rightly=20 understood, also works congruently with Christianity and protects its = =93right to=20 pursue the project started by Jesus=94 (202).

Robbins = correctly observes=20 the narrator=92s focus on aspects of power, especially the narrator=92s = recognition=20 that the locus of power resides in the military and legal structure of = the Roman=20 Empire (204). So the narrator=92s strategy[21] = is to yoke Christianity to Rome=92s success by showing=97the inverse of = Rome=92s=20 expansion=97the expansion of Christianity from Jerusalem to Rome (205). = The=20 narrator aggressively makes the case that the power structure of = Christianity=20 works symbiotically with the power structure of Rome. But, for the = narrator, the=20 power that brings Paul to Rome is the God of Israel. Therefore one of = the=20 defining issues for Luke-Acts is the relation of the power of the = emperor to the=20 power of God (207).

Here is where = stories about=20 Roman centurions play a key role (e.g., Lk 7:1-10; Acts 10). God=92s = power can be=20 transmitted in the same way as the power of Rome, an argument that is=20 strategically placed on the lips of the centurion (via his = =93friends,=94 Lk 7:8).=20 Robbins notes that it is also important that this centurion=97in the = territory=20 over which the Roman emperor reigns=97has needs that the Roman emperor = cannot=20 fulfill. Jesus, as the broker of God=92s blessings fulfills that need, = and the=20 centurion, a broker within the power structure of Rome becomes a client = of the=20 God of Israel and the broker of that God=97Jesus. So the centurion = stands in=20 obligation to Jesus just as the Jewish elders stand in obligation to the = centurion (he served as a broker of the emperor=92s blessing to them by = =93building=20 them a synagogue=94 (Lk 7:5).[22] = So the Roman centurion, a representative of the power structure of Rome, = accepts=20 and is indebted to the power structure of the God of Israel (209).[23] = Since God is the one who overseers the symbiotic relationship between = these two=20 structures of power, the narrator implicitly argues that the power = structure of=20 God is pre-eminent.

Luke 7:1-10: = Texts and=20 Context in Dialogue

I am not a = specialist in=20 socio-rhetorical interpretation, and my own approach to these narratives = is not=20 Robbins=92s approach, but we share the same interdisciplinary = philosophy. In fact,=20 I can peruse my work over the past few years and clearly see how the = =93Five=20 Textures=94 delineated by Robbins are incorporated in various ways in my = work and=20 how some of these textures need to be more fully integrated in my = approach.[24] = Robbins=92s socio-rhetorical interpretation is a comprehensive attempt = to provide=20 a programmatic model to establish and facilitate an arena where these = differing=20 approaches=97such as the myriad of approaches currently found in New = Testament=20 studies=97can be in dialogue with each other.[25]

Robbins=92s = Five Textures are=20 not discrete categories; neither will be my dialogue with them. My = analysis of=20 the inner texture of Luke 7:1-10 will lead to insights that I will = explore in my=20 analysis of the intertexture. But these textures are continually in = dialogue, so=20 my analysis of intertexture will inherently lead to additional insights = about=20 the inner texture. Similarly, my analyses of elements of the inner = texture and=20 intertexture will lead to insights about elements I should explore in = the social=20 and cultural texture. But my analysis of the social and cultural texture = will=20 also lead to new insights about the inner texture and intertexture of = Luke=20 7:1-10. So it goes also, with my analysis of the ideological texture: = Like the=20 warp and woof of a tapestry, the textures are mutually dependent and = inherently=20 interwoven; they reinforce and build upon each other.

Jesus and the centurion never = meet in=20 this intriguing story (as they do in Mt), but the narrative nevertheless = juxtaposes them in fascinating ways. As we will see, the story=20 compares/contrasts two empires=97that of Rome and that of God. The = centurion is a=20 retainer=97an agent and enforcer of the redistribution system of the = Roman Empire=20 in which the retainers enable and facilitate the transfer of goods from = the=20 non-elite to the elite. Jesus, according to the narrator=92s ideological = (conceptual) point of view, is a broker/mediator of the blessings of the = kingdom=20 of God (God =3D patron; Jesus =3D broker; people =3D clients). So the = narrative=20 juxtaposes two people with different but analogous social roles: both = are in=20 positions of authority, whether in the Roman Empire or God=92s empire. = The=20 centurion acknowledges and Jesus demonstrates the supremacy of God=92s = empire.=20 God=92s empire can accomplish what the Roman Empire can only claim to=20 accomplish.[26] = The story also brings together two ethnicities=97Jew and Gentile=97and = begins to=20 clarify the relationship between the two groups (cf. 1:54-55, 67-79; = 2:28-32;=20 4:16-30; 7:9).

Inner Texture of Luke 7:1-10

The character = Jesus=20 dominates the narrative of Luke. Beginning with Luke 4:1, he is the = center of=20 interest, is at the center of all exchanges, and, until the passion = narrative,=20 is in charge as the main actor. Since Jesus is the hero of the story, = the=20 narrator expects readers to evaluate other characters in Luke according = to their=20 responses to Jesus=97or, in Acts, to one of his followers. Many = characters belong=20 to a group (e.g., the Pharisees, Sadducees, and priests) and can be = evaluated=97in=20 varying degrees of complexity=97together.[27] = Numerous other minor characters flit across the stage of Luke and Acts = and are=20 more difficult to define or delineate. It remains to be seen how the = centurion=20 in Luke 7:1-10 correlates with the portrayal of other centurions in Luke = and=20 Acts, but it is clear that this centurion, like all characters in Luke, = directs=20 one=92s attention to the main character, Jesus. All characters serve to = set off,=20 contrast with, dramatize, and engage Jesus, thus highlighting his = identity. The=20 narrator provides a number of divergent characters so that they can = either draw=20 out aspects of Jesus=92 character and/or provide alternative responses = to Jesus;=20 the narrator=92s ideology is clearly seen by the way in which it is = clear which=20 responses are seen as =93appropriate=94 or =93inappropriate.=94[28] =

The primary = issue at=20 hand=97especially early in the narrative=97is the identity of Jesus, and = the=20 narrator effectively paints his portrait. Direct definition clearly = identifies=20 Jesus as =93Lord=94 (1:43, 76), =93Son of the Most High=94 (1:32), = =93Son of God=94 (1:35),=20 =93Christ=94 (2:26-32), and various other positive evaluations (e.g., = 2:40, 46-47,=20 49, 52; 3:15-17). These statements are made by characters whom the = narrator=20 presents as reliable and authoritative. Simeon, for example, is = =93righteous and=20 devout . . . and the Holy Spirit was upon him=94 (2:25). Indirect = presentation=20 also portrays Jesus in a positive way,[29] = and the ultimate voice of authority in Luke=92s narrative world (God=92s = voice)=20 declares that Jesus is =93my beloved son=94 (3:22).[30] = Some characters do not understand, and the various questionings of = Jesus=92=20 identity is but one example (e.g., 4:22, 36; 5:21; 7:19, 49; 8:25; 9:9, = 18).=20 Other characters (e.g., the centurion) have some insight into Jesus=92 = identity,=20 and readers (if they concur with the narrator=92s ideological point of = view) can=20 either knowingly nod in approval at their (sometimes limited) insight or = shudder=20 at the demonic powers who face their hero (e.g., 4:3, 34, 41; 5:5, 8, = 12; 7:6-8,=20 16; 8:28; 9:20). Chapter 7 of Luke continues and in fact heightens this = interest=20 in the identity of Jesus. Readers encounter (a) friends of a centurion = who=20 address Jesus as =93Lord=94 and report that the centurion considers = himself not=20 worthy for Jesus to enter his house (7:6); (b) the narrator continues to = label=20 Jesus as =93Lord=94 (e.g., 7:13); (c) Jesus is designated as =93a great = prophet=94 by=20 =93all=94 in a large crowd from Nain, and the word spread throughout all = Judea and=20 the surrounding country (7:11-12, 16-17); (d) John the Baptist seeks to = learn=20 Jesus=92 identity, and Jesus responds by echoing his sermon in Nazareth = and=20 reporting that John was the one who was to prepare the way for him = (7:18-23,=20 27); (e) Jesus calls himself the =93Son of Man=94 who is labeled a = =93glutton and=20 drunkard=94 by his opponents (7:34); and (f) the story of Jesus in the = home of=20 Simon the Pharisee illustrates that not only is Jesus a =93great = prophet=94 (cf.=20 7:16, 39) but that Jesus is much more than a prophet: Although Simon = refers to=20 Jesus only as =93teacher=94 (7:40), Jesus, according to the narrator=92s = ideological=20 point of view, has the authority to act in God=92s place (as God=92s = =93broker=94 of=20 heavenly blessings) and to pronounce the forgiveness of sins (7:48).

The earlier sections of Luke = also prepare=20 readers for a conflict that occurs as the good news of God encounters = opposition=20 from a recalcitrant humanity. Signals of such conflicts reverberate = throughout=20 the narrative, beginning with the infancy narratives. The narrator = intersperses=20 the themes of reversal (e.g., 1:52-52), Israel=92s salvation (1:32-33, = 54-55,=20 68-79; 2:25, 30-32, 38), with the incorporation of Gentiles in God=92s = plan (e.g.,=20 2:30-32, =93all peoples=94 and =93a light of revelation to the = Gentiles=94). Simeon=92s=20 oracles are the most revealing in this respect (2:29-35). They give the = first=20 indication of the tension that will characterize the whole narrative(s) = of Luke=20 and Acts: the revelation of God and its rejection or acceptance by the = people.[31] = The interaction of Jesus=92 prophetic announcement of God=92s kingdom = and the=20 various responses to that message provide the primary narrative tension = in the=20 text. This interaction reverberates in Luke 7:1-10. Note, for example, = that the=20 centurion, at this stage of the narrative (7:1-10), is the only non-Jew = to gain=20 the approval of both Jesus and the narrator because of his = =93faith.=94

After = Simeon=92s prophecy=20 explicitly foretells the conflicts ahead, signs of conflict soon appear = in the=20 narrative during the episodes prior to Jesus=92 public ministry (3:1 =96 = 4:13). The=20 preaching of John the Baptist (3:7-9, 16-17) prepares the way in more = than one=20 respect: =93all flesh shall see the salvation of God=94 (3:6, cf. Simeon = in=20 2:30-32). John warns those of Jewish descent not to trust solely on = their=20 ancestry, and he also explains to soldiers what the implications are for = them to=20 =93bear fruits worthy of repentance=94 (3:8, 14).[32] = The encounter of Jesus and the devil also sets the stage for the = conflicts that=20 Jesus will continue to endure, although the fulfillment of prophecies in = the=20 narrative attempt to guide readers to the belief that Jesus will = continue to=20 triumph over the opposition.

Luke 4:16-30 is = by far the=20 most important scene that prepares readers for Luke 7:1-10. This episode = contains the inaugural statement of Jesus=92 mission and is a microcosm = of the=20 entire ministry of Jesus. Almost every scene in Luke and Acts can be = related to=20 this scene, especially the Galilean ministry (4:14 =96 9:50).[33] = Jesus offers a proclamation of release (4:18-21), and the narrator then = sets out=20 to demonstrate that Jesus is indeed doing what he was sent to do, = according to=20 that programmatic declaration in the Nazareth synagogue, such as = bringing good=20 news to the poor, proclaiming release to the captives, recovery of sight = to the=20 blind, liberty for the oppressed, and the acceptable year of the Lord. = Some of=20 the activities related to this message that occur during the Galilean = ministry=20 include: casting out an unclean demon from a man who was a captive to = and=20 oppressed by that demon (4:31-37); the healing of many people (4:38-41); = the=20 cleansing of a leper, releasing him of his disease (5:12-16); the = healing of a=20 paralytic (oppression) (5:17-26); the healing of a man with a withered = hand=20 (6:6-11); preaching to the poor and hungry (6:20-21); the healing of a=20 centurion=92s servant (7:1-10); the raising of a widow=92s son at Nain = (7:11-17);=20 announcing the forgiveness of sins of a sinful woman (7:36-50); and = other=20 episodes in Luke (e.g., 8:26-33, 40-56; 9:37-43; et al.).

In fact, if = readers=20 recognize the implicit assumptions in the narrative that illnesses have = social=20 consequences in the ancient Mediterranean world, then it is possible to = cluster=20 all of Jesus=92 healing activities into this proclamation of release.[34] = People assaulted or possessed by unclean/evil spirits, for example, can = be=20 properly described as oppressed or held prisoner by demons[35] = (note how the spirit/demon in Luke 9:38-39 =93seizes=94 the child, = =93convulses=94 him,=20 =93mauls=94 him, and will =93scarcely leave=94 him).

News of the = healings=20 performed spreads through =93all the surrounding country=94 (4:14-15). = In Luke 4:23=20 readers learn (for the first time) that Jesus had already performed = miracles in=20 Capernaum, although the narrator chooses not to relate them directly. = But the=20 narrator does decide to reveal (additional) healings in Capernaum = directly after=20 the Nazareth =93sermon=94 (4:31-40). Jesus heals a man of an unclean = demon in the=20 Capernaum synagogue (4:31-37), and =93a report about him began to reach = every=20 place in the region=94 (4:37). Jesus also heals Simon=92s mother-in-law = of a =93high=20 fever=94 (4:38-39) and heals =93any who were sick with various kinds of = diseases=94=20 (4:40-41). So, by means of these references to these previous healings = in=20 Capernaum, the narrator prepares readers sufficiently for the = centurion=92s=20 knowledge of Jesus and his healing activities (7:3).[36]

But the = narrator continues=20 to portray rejection as well as acceptance of Jesus and his message. = Conflict=20 reappears in the five controversy stories of Luke 5:17 =96 6:11. The = chiastic=20 pattern of this section also contains a progression of hostility, with = 5:33-39=20 as the hinge that stresses Jesus=92 identity as the new agent of God=92s = saving=20 action.[37] = The progression in the narrative is clearly seen in the reactions to = Jesus=92=20 words and deeds: All =93glorified God=94 at the end of the first = controversy story=20 (5:26). The next three controversies do not contain reactions from any = opponents=20 to Jesus, but Luke 6:11 gives a negative response: The opponents of = Jesus are=20 =93filled with fury=94 (anoia).

Tension thus is = heightened=20 by these differing reactions to Jesus, but it is not only Jesus=92 = actions of=20 healing that illustrate the programmatic statement in Luke 4:16-30; it = is also=20 his words. The teachings of Jesus included in the Lukan =93Sermon on the = Plain=94=20 (6:20-49) are strategically placed just before the story of the = centurion in=20 Luke 7. This =93sermon,=94 prefaced by healings and exorcisms in = 6:17-19,=20 illustrates the nature of discipleship=97those beliefs, actions, and = attitudes=20 that must characterize those persons in the community of the kingdom of = God.=20 This sermon illustrates once again the absolute necessity for words and = deeds to=20 coalesce: =93Why do you call me =91Lord, Lord=94 and do not do what I = tell you?=94=20 (6:46). The three exemplary stories of Luke 7 (1-10; 11-17; 36-50) = reinforce=20 this connection,[38] = as does the interlude of John the Baptist=92s question and Jesus=92 = response=20 (7:18-35).

A dialogic = reading of Luke=20 7:1-10 must await further texts and contexts, but the story=97which = includes=20 Jesus, the centurion, the centurion=92s doulos/pais, the Jewish = elders, and the=20 crowd=97may be outlined in this way:

7:1 =96 = Setting: The=20 transition from sermon to action and from the =93plain=94 to = Capernaum

7:2 =96 = Introduction: A=20 description of the situation of the centurion=92s doulos/pais

7:3 =96 First = delegation of=20 Jewish elders =93sent=94 by centurion with request for healing (indirect = discourse)

7:4-5 =96 = Speech of Jewish=20 elders praising the centurion as =93worthy=94 (related in direct = discourse)

7:6a =96 Jesus = responds and=20 travels =93not far=94 from the house

7:6b =96 Second = delegation of=20 friends =93sent=94 by centurion

7:6c-8 =96 = Friends relate=20 centurion=92s own petition:

Statement: =93Lord, do = not trouble=20 yourself=94

=20 Rationale : =93for I am not worthy=94 for Jesus to enter his = house

=20 Conclusion: =93therefore I did not presume to come to you=94

=20 Statement/Request: =93But only speak the word and let my servant = be=20 healed=94

=20 Rationale: =93For I also am a man set under authority=94

=20 Example/Analogy (from minor to major): =93with soldiers under = me=94=20 [including slaves who also obey his orders]

7:9 =96 = Response of=20 Jesus:

Description: Jesus = =93was amazed at=20 him=94

Speech:=20 Jesus praises the centurion=92s faith to the crowd

7:10 =96 = Conclusion:=20 Delegations return and find the doulos/pais in good health =

Intertexture in Luke 7:1-10 in Dialogue with Inner=20 Texture

Just as=20 the inaugural statement of Jesus=92 mission in Luke 4:16-30 provides the = primary=20 context for the literary context of Luke 7:1-10, it generates crucial = elements=20 of the intertextual texture of the story as well. Jesus, =93as was his = custom,=94=20 goes to the synagogue on the Sabbath. He reads from the prophet Isaiah. = In=20 socio-rhetorical terms, this use of scripture in Luke is a recitation = (primarily=20 from the LXX with omissions of such items as =93the day of = vengeance=94),=20 conflation, and reconfiguration from Isaiah 61:1-2 and 58:6 (cf. Lk = 4:18-19,=20 21). The Lukan Jesus then announces that the scripture is fulfilled = =93Today . . .=20 in your hearing=94 and recites a parabolē (=93Doctor, cure = yourself=94)[39] = and an aphorism (=93[N]o prophet is acceptable in the prophet=92s = hometown=94). More=20 germane to Luke 7:1-10, however, are the two examples that the Lukan = Jesus=20 utilizes: He recites narratives concerning Elijah (1 Kgs 17:8-24) and = Elisha (2=20 Kgs 5:1-19).

These words of = Jesus=20 continue the process in which the narrator attempts to persuade readers = to=20 conclude that Jesus was indeed a prophet. First Jesus claims that the = scripture=20 was fulfilled that day through him. Second he claims indirectly, by = using the=20 proverb in 4:24, that he was a prophet. Third, by comparing himself to = Elijah=20 and Elisha, he again puts himself in the category of a prophet. Fourth, = the fact=20 that he knows (it seems) the inner thoughts of the people in the = synagogue=20 implies that he, like a prophet, can know the minds of other people (cf. = Luke=20 7:39, 47). Finally, the progression in the narrative, as readers = encounter=20 various prophecies being fulfilled by Jesus, attempts to lead readers to = agree=20 with this characterization.

The recitation = of=20 narratives about Elijah and Elisha thus performs a number of functions. = Jesus=20 identifies himself with such mighty prophets of Israel, but implicit in = this=20 identification is the apparent assumption that they do not fulfill the = desires=20 of healing by some in their own homeland[40] = and that these prophets and their messages were also rejected by others = (cf. Lk=20 4:28-29). The fate of =93Israel=94 in Luke-Acts is a subject of endless = debate in=20 scholarship; however one reads the evidence, though, it is clear that in = the=20 days of the prophets Elijah and Elisha, God=92s blessings were bestowed = on=20 Gentiles. These two prophets then become models for aspects of Jesus=92 = own=20 healing ministry. The story (Lk 4:25-26) of Elijah being sent to the = widow in=20 Zarephath in Sidon, for example, prefigures for Luke the story of Jesus = bringing=20 back to life the widow=92s son in Nain (Lk 7:11-17).[41] = The story of Elisha and Namaan foreshadows, for Luke, the story of Jesus = and the=20 centurion (Lk 7:1-10).

Since the = narrator=97through=20 the voice of Jesus=97has already drawn readers=92 attention to the story = of Elisha=20 and Namaan (Lk 4:27), the story of Jesus and the centurion in Luke = 7:1-10=20 resonates more deeply with 2 Kgs 5:1-19. Although the stories show = significant=20 differences, Lk 7:1-10=92s placement directly before the story of the = raising of=20 the widow=92s son=97which even more explicitly evokes the paradigmatic = nature of=20 Elijah=92s action of raising the son of the widow in Zarephath=97almost = necessitates=20 the implied reader making the connection between Jesus=92 actions and = the actions=20 of Elijah/Elisha in these two stories.[42] = In addition, some commonalities reinforce the intertextual connections = between=20 the story of the centurion and the story of Namaan:[43] = (1) The centurion is a well-respected Gentile officer (Lk 7:2, 4, = =93worthy=94);=20 Namaan is a well-respected Gentile officer (2 Kgs 5:1-2, =93great = man,=94 in =93high=20 favor,=94 and =93a mighty warrior=94). (2) Both men, although well = respected, are on=20 the margins of Jewish society because they are Gentiles=97Namaan even = more so=20 because of his leprosy. (3) Yet Jewish people intercede for both men: = Jewish=20 elders appeal to Jesus on the centurion=92s behalf (Lk 7:3-5; the elders = =93appealed=20 to [Jesus] earnestly=94); a captive Jewish girl provides the necessary = information=20 to Namaan=92s wife to allow him to seek healing in Israel (2 Kgs 5:2-5). = (4)=20 Neither men meet their benefactor face to face: The centurion sends a = delegation=20 to Jesus to request that Jesus come to his house and heal his slave but = then=20 sends a second delegation of friends to say that he isn=92t worthy for = Jesus to=20 enter his house (Lk 7:3-7). Namaan waits by the entrance of Elisha=92s = household,=20 but Elisha won=92t even come to the entrance to give his prophetic = message to=20 Namaan. He instead sends a messenger to deliver his instructions (2 Kgs = 5:10).=20 Note, however, that Namaan returns after the healing, now that he knows = that=20 =93there is a prophet in Israel=94 (2 Kgs 5:8) and that =93there is no = God in all the=20 earth except in Israel=94 (2 Kgs 5:15). This aspect of the story = resonates nicely=20 with the story of the ten lepers later in the narrative of Luke, where = the=20 Samaritan is the lone person of the ten people healed who returns to = =93thank=94=20 Jesus and =93give praise to God=94 (Lk 17:11-19). (5) Both the = centurion=92s slave and=20 Namaan are healed from a distance. Elisha stays inside his house, and = Namaan is=20 healed after washing seven times in the Jordan River (2 Kgs 5:14). The=20 centurion=92s slave was healed while Jesus was in the vicinity (Jesus = was =93not far=20 from the house,=94 Lk 7:6), and he was healed by the time the = centurion=92s friends=20 returned from giving Jesus the centurion=92s message (Lk 7:10).

The impact of = these=20 intertextural elements includes reinforcing the characterization of = Jesus as a=20 =93great prophet,=94 as well as a rationale for such a prophet = assisting/healing=20 Gentiles. So some of the primary intertextual elements stem from the = Hebrew=20 Scriptures, but there are still numerous inner textural and intertextual = aspects=20 to this story that only will become more clear after additional social = and=20 cultural elements are integrated into the interpretation.

Social and Cultural Texture in Luke 7:1-10 =

in Dialogue with Inner Texture and=20 Intertexture

Robbins=20 carefully=97and correctly=97differentiates between social, cultural, and = historical=20 intertexture and social and = cultural=20 texture. Intertexture = denotes the=20 phenomena in the text that raise the issue of social meanings that = interpreters=20 investigate with data outside of the texts, whereas social and cultural = texture=20 refers to a texts social and cultural nature as a text.[44] = The relationship between these differing textures, though, is = dialogic=97note, for=20 example, the intertextual social roles, institutions, codes, and = relationships=20 that inherently interact with the common social and cultural topics = (e.g., honor=20 and shame, purity rules, patron-client relationships, kinship, etc.). = For that=20 reason, I will include social, cultural, and historical intertexture in = this=20 section.

The=20 necessity of a social, cultural, and historical matrix for the = interpretation of=20 a text does not mean a return to the elusive search for =93the=94 = specific=20 historical event that may or may not lie =93behind=94 the text. Such an = event is=20 unrepeatable and unrecoverable, and readers actually produce such=20 reconstructions =93in front of=94 the text. The quest for =93history=94 = in that sense=20 produces tentative and more-or-less probable reconstructions of what may = have=20 been. The horizon of such =93historicity=94 always recedes. That is one = reason=20 why=97as Robbins notes=97that interpreters tend to disagree about = whether such=20 social, cultural, and historical intertextural elements are present in a = text.[45] = But the Lukan narrative was not written in a literary, social, cultural, = or=20 historical vacuum; it partakes vigorously in such dialogical discourse. = The=20 literary, social, cultural, and historical worlds intersect with each = other=20 dialogically. Since texts are produced by particular writers working in=20 particular cultures and at specific historical moments, the text is, in = part at=20 least, created and influenced by those factors. An examination of the = social,=20 cultural, and historical intertexture, as well as that = social and=20 cultural texture of this = narrative=20 will reveal many new insights into the narrative, social, cultural, and = perhaps=20 historical worlds that are in dialogue with Luke-Acts.

One of the key = elements in=20 all of the textures of this text is the role of the centurion. Therefore = an=20 extensive analysis is necessary in order to shed more interpretive light = on Luke=20 7:1-10.

Centurions

Centurions provided the = Roman army=20 with officers and administrators of proven military experience, = reliability, and=20 efficiency. The office also provided a Roman citizen soldier with = =93glittering=20 prospects of social advancement=94 (after long years of military = service),=20 especially upon retirement.[46] = The hope of becoming a primipilaris=20 was the primary stimulus for men both to seek the centurionate and = to=20 persevere as a centurion beyond the normal length of service of others = in the=20 army below their rank. The establishment of a fixed term of service and = a=20 gratuity in land or money made long service not only the goal, but also = the=20 norm. Since retirement gratuities were linked to pay scales, this meant = that=20 centurions=97because they received a higher rate of pay=97could receive = large sums=20 of money upon retirement (see Suetonius, Caligula 44). Centurions = usually rose=20 through the ranks after 13 to 20 years of service, although other = avenues to the=20 office did exist.[47]

The presence of = a centurion=20 in Capernaum according to Luke 7:1-10 leads many commentators to observe = that=20 Roman troops were not stationed in this area prior to 44 CE=97or = especially 66 CE,=20 when Vespasian set up army camps in places like Sepphoris. Such = commentators=20 tend to argue that the centurion would have worked for Herod Antipas, = performing=20 police work or=97more likely=97=93customs service.=94[48] = The text does not delve into these issues=97although I should note that = the=20 increased presence of Roman soldiers in Palestine was indeed a reality = at the=20 time when Luke-Acts was written. The narrative itself seems to assume = the=20 straightforward identification of the centurion as a Gentile, a Roman = citizen,=20 and as a (former?) commander of 80-100 men.[49] = The narrative also assumes that readers place this official in the = context of=20 other soldiers mentioned in the story so far (Lk 3:14; 4:27).

Although we = cannot impose=20 specific aspects of historicity=97that is, whether or not in the event = =93behind=94=20 this story in Luke the man was indeed a Roman centurion=97the social, = cultural,=20 and historical intertexture and social and cultural texture provide much = helpful=20 data. The Lukan centurion, in this context, stands in an ambiguous = position=97both=20 as a Gentile oppressor and as a broker of imperial favor. The Romans, as = Richard=20 Horsley notes, both during and after their conquests =93terrorized = people into=20 submission . . . through the ruthless devastation of the land and towns, = slaughter and enslavement of the people,=94 and =93crucifixion of people = along the=20 roadways or in public places.=94[50] =

The ambiguous=20 social/cultural position of the centurion in this text is also = reinforced by an=20 analysis of the social-economic influence of the Roman army. Since Roman = soldiers received a good salary, in later rabbinic literature centurions = were=20 seen as very wealthy.[51] = Thus, for a few people in occupied lands, some economic benefits = resulted: An=20 army base was a large consumer of services and supplies, which led to = merchants=20 providing those supplies (although such supplies often came at the = expense of=20 local populations). The army also provided and built services for = occupied=20 territories=97roads and aqueducts, for example, although such projects = often came=20 at the expense of local rural residents who often found themselves = participating=20 in the paving of roads or providing for their upkeep.[52]

Later rabbinic = literature=20 demonstrates the differing attitudes that could exist with regard to = occupying=20 Roman forces. Ze=92ev Safrai,[53] = Martin Goodman,[54] = and Benjamin Isaac[55] = helpfully detail some positive elements and some negative elements in = this=20 relationship. In spite of some benefits (for a few) that may have = accrued from=20 some of the contacts, there were many disadvantages: the exaction of = dues=20 payable to the army, forced labor and transport (cf. Mt 5:41; n.b. the absence of this = saying in Lk is=20 quite interesting), and confiscations of shelter, food, and wine. Like = the Roman=20 government, these activities show a concentration on extracting as many = goods=20 and services as possible from native populations. Significant hostility, = of=20 course, resulted from such mistreatment. Both Goodman and Isaac note = that it was=20 considered very unwise for a Galilean to oppose the wishes of a = centurion,=20 because his power to punish those who offended him was even greater than = that of=20 a city councilor.[56] = So, in the environment of the first century, it is likely that readers = would=20 understand that the Jewish elders in Luke, even if they were indebted to = the=20 generosity of the centurion, were well aware of the centurion=92s power = (just as=20 the Lukan centurion was well aware of his power over others, Lk 7:8). As = Isaac=20 notes, subjugated people were helpless before the power of the Roman = military.[57]

On the other = hand, there is=20 also historical evidence of some Roman soldiers serving as = patrons/brokers for=20 Jewish individuals and communities.[58] = Thus the role that the centurion plays in Lk 7:1-10 fits well within the = historical, social, and cultural evidence we find concerning = Palestine.

Patron-Broker-Client/Limited=20 Good

Most persons in = the first=20 century were at the mercy of power-holders outside their social realm. = Their=20 sense of powerlessness was often reinforced by the climate and lack of = natural=20 resources in many areas of the Mediterranean world. Such persons had = little or=20 no control over the conditions that governed their lives. This more-or = less=20 determined existence was verified by experience and led to the cognitive = orientation that all desired goods=97social (e.g., honor), economic = (e.g., land),=20 and natural (e.g., health)=97existed in a finite quantity and were = always in short=20 supply[59]

One of the = strategies in=20 limited good societies is the formation of horizontal and vertical = alliances.=20 Relationships among those of equal rank (e.g., the =93friends=94 of Lk = 7:6) are=20 based on an informal principle of reciprocity, an implicit obligation = that is=20 enforced by the honor and shame system. This implicit contract is an = informal=20 binding of pairs in an ongoing series of acts of mutual support.[60]

Asymmetrical = contracts can=20 also be established between people on differing social levels. Persons = on a=20 higher social level can serve as patrons for their clients on a lower = social=20 level; the goods or services in this reciprocal relationship will not be = similar. Patronage thus occurs whenever someone adopts a posture of = deference to=20 another deemed more powerful and therefore gains access to resources as = a=20 result.[61]

James C. Scott = describes=20 how patronage works in the =93moral economy of the peasant.=94[62] = Peasants are like people who are standing permanently up to their chins = in=20 water, so that even a ripple is sufficient to drown them. Such peasants = are not=20 radically egalitarian but instead=97living in a limited good = society=97believe that=20 all persons are entitled to a living out of the resources of the = village.[63] = The peasants=92 =93subsistence ethic=94 involves both a norm of = reciprocity and an=20 ethical belief in a right of subsistence. Patron-broker-client ties, = then, are a=20 ubiquitous form of =93social insurance.=94 Although clients often do = what they can=20 to cast this relationship in moral terms since their mere bargaining = power is=20 minimal (e.g., the Jewish elders=92 praise of the centurion as = =93worthy=94 and that=20 he =93loves our people,=94 Lk 7:4-5), patronage is more to be = recommended for its=20 resources than for its reliability (cf. the synagogue =93built=94 by the = centurion,=20 Lk 7:5). Yet patron-client relations do include an expectation of moral=20 obligation; people who have resources are expected to help in = difficult=20 circumstances.[64] = In a similar way, I would argue, the narrator of Luke-Acts uses this = centurion=20 as a moral example in an attempt to persuade readers that they = should=97if they=20 have the economic means=97behave in a similar fashion. Thus the = centurion is one=20 of many models in Luke-Acts of the proper attitude and behavior of=20 socially-advantaged patrons should have=97both to Jesus and to members = of their=20 local community.

Patron-client = relationships=20 exist in a variety of concrete forms but have a number of similar = elements,[65] = two of which are the strong element of inequality and the necessity for=20 reciprocity. Since the Jewish elders indicate that the centurion = =93built our=20 synagogue for us,=94 they have entered into a patron-client contract. In = addition,=20 the centurion could also be seen as the broker of imperial resources for = the=20 local population (even if the centurion is an agent of Herod Antipas, = since=20 Antipas was a client of Rome). Readers should note, however, that the = centurion=20 also represents imperial control, since he is an agent and enforcer of = the=20 imperial status quo.[66] = Yet none of the characters or the narrator explicitly recognizes or = condemns=20 such activities=97although the centurion implicitly recognizes them = (7:8)

The story in = Luke 7:1-10 in=20 some respects is an excellent illustration of patron-broker-client=20 relationships, but there are, as we shall see later, some intriguing and = some=20 subversive elements as well. Since the centurion serves as a broker of = imperial=20 favor (or as a patron by building the synagogue), he sends his = clients=97the=20 Jewish elders=97to Jesus in order to request Jesus to come and heal his = doulos. These Jewish elders = are both=20 obligated and loyal to their patron=97one of the primary = responsibilities of=20 clients was to praise the patron and the benefits he brings. So their = praise and=20 recommendation of the centurion to Jesus are customary for those persons = in a=20 patron-broker-client position (Lk 7:4-5).[67]

Jesus responds = without=20 hesitation (this request should be seen as a positive challenge to his = honor),=20 and his response results in an awkward moment in the narration. As Jesus = nears=20 the house, the centurion sends =93friends=94 with a conflicting message: = The Jewish=20 elders called him =93worthy,=94 but his =93friends=94 relate that the = centurion=20 considers himself =93unworthy=94 for Jesus to enter his house; in fact = he did not=20 even =93presume=94 to come to Jesus himself (7:6-7).[68] = Did the centurion assume that the Jewish elders could broker the = blessings that=20 Jesus had to offer and that Jesus would not have to travel to his = house?[69] = Did he believe that he as a Gentile had no access to Jesus and therefore = was=20 surprised by Jesus=92 willingness to come to his house?[70] =

Those and other = questions=20 are left unanswered by the text, but we can evaluate the contrasting = social=20 relations portrayed in the text. The Jewish elders respond loyally to = their=20 patron-broker, and Jesus apparently acquiesces to this = patron-broker-client=20 relationship, because he agrees to go with them to the centurion=92s = house. Yet=20 his =93Sermon on the Plain=94 in the previous chapter actually = undermined many of=20 the aspects of the patronage system. Could it be, as Green suggests, = that the=20 motivation of the Lukan Jesus to respond to the centurion is more = indicative of=20 his words in the previous chapter to =93Love your enemies?=94[71] = Green=92s interpretation is intriguing, but it is more likely that the = message of=20 this story is more complex than that and more aggressively ideological: = The=20 patron-broker-client system of the Roman Empire is vastly inferior to = the=20 patron-broker-client relationship of the kingdom of God as proclaimed by = Jesus=20 (see =93Ideological Texture=94 below).

The contrast = between the=20 messages of the two groups sent to Jesus is also intriguing. The = clients=97the=20 Jewish elders=97appeal to Jesus earnestly on behalf of their benefactor = and praise=20 him as worthy. They operate as good clients=97to their benefactor the = centurion.=20 But the second delegation=97the =93friends=94 of the = centurion=97apparently=20 ventriloquate the centurion=92s true feelings: =93Lord . . . I am not = worthy. . . .=94=20 The centurion not only humbles himself by calling himself not worthy, he = also=20 addresses Jesus with a title of respect: =93Lord.=94 This direct = definition of Jesus=20 is a key factor in the characterization of both Jesus and the centurion, = and its=20 presence in the centurion=92s address to Jesus (via his friends) is in = striking=20 contrast to the address of the Jewish elders to Jesus on the behalf of = their=20 benefactor. In addition, the second delegation of =93friends=94 recasts = the readers=92=20 perspective that emphasizes mutuality and commonality, not the debt owed = to a=20 patron-broker.[72]

The cultural = script of=20 honor and shame plays a role here as well. Honor, in the broadest sense = of the=20 word, is compliance with traditional patterns of behavior.[73] = Thus honor, in this sense, is nearly identical with =93goodness=94 or = =93virtue.=94 A=20 man of honor is simply a good or virtuous man, with honor being attained = and=20 maintained by conformity to prevailing cultural norms. Yet honor also = requires=20 more than this passive acceptance of norms. Honor also depends on the=20 achievement and of superiority and distinction.[74] = The honor rating that the narrator and others ascribe to Jesus, though, = goes=20 well beyond these customary standards. Jesus, according to the narrator, = is a=20 prominent and a limit breaker who can transcend prevailing social and = cultural=20 norms (see note 30). Therefore, Jesus=92 actions dictate a new pattern = of behavior=20 based on his own authority as God=92s representative=97or broker. The = narrator=92s=20 strategy is to convince or confirm readers=92 affirmations of the = essential=20 correctness of Jesus=92 words and actions.[75] = The crucial test for any character is whether or not he or she accepts = Jesus=92=20 authority as limit-breaker, broker, and, finally, Lord. The centurion = accepts=20 Jesus=92 authority, proclaims Jesus identity as the broker of God=92s = blessings, and=20 addresses him as =93Lord.=94 The Jewish elders have not reached this = position of=20 faith, as Jesus=92 words make clear (Lk 7:9).

It is here that = Green=92s=20 analysis is indeed correct in my view, although he reaches his = conclusion for=20 different reasons. The centurion declares his lack of patronal control = over=20 Jesus and stresses Jesus=92 superiority. He recognizes Jesus=92 = authority (and=20 identity?), contradicts the Jewish elders=92 assessment of himself, and = provides=20 an alternative rationale for Jesus=92 assistance for his doulos/pais. He has faith in = Jesus=92=20 authority, capacity to act, and willingness to exercise that authority = on his=20 behalf.[76] = The Jewish elders, on the other hand, are captive to an inferior=20 patron-broker-client system and do not possess the centurion=92s insight = into the=20 identity and authority of Jesus as the broker of God=92s blessings.

The centurion, = through the=20 message delivered by his friends, signals that he does not consider = Jesus as one=20 of his clients. Instead he recognizes the superiority of Jesus=97just as = the=20 centurion is a broker of imperial favor and the agent of imperial power, = so=20 Jesus is the broker of God=92s blessings and the agent of the kingdom of = God. In=20 the world of Luke-Acts, God is the ultimate patron and benefactor (e.g., = 1:46-55, 68-79), whose resources are graciously given and mediated = through Jesus=20 as broker. The outline of the patronage hierarchy can be graphed this = way:[77]

Rome &nbs= p; = ; =20 Luke

Patron &nbs= p;=20 Caesar &nbs= p; = ;=20 God

Broker &nbs= p;=20 Elites/Retainers =20 Jesus

Client &nbs= p; =20 Citizens &nbs= p; =20 Supplicants

In Luke 7:1-7, = the=20 patronage hierarchy is given specific shape:

Rome=20 &nbs= p; = ; =20 Luke

Patron &nbs= p;=20 Caesar &nbs= p; = ;=20 God

Broker &nbs= p;=20 Centurion &nbs= p; =20 Jesus

Client &nbs= p; =20 Jewish Elders &nbs= p; =20 Centurion

Benefit &nbs= p;=20 Synagogue &nbs= p; =20 Healing

In the Gospel = of Luke,=20 Jesus transforms, in many respects, the concept of patron-client = relations=97note,=20 for example, the theme of reversal (e.g., 1:51-53) and the stress on = leaders=20 becoming like servants (e.g., =93The kings of the Gentiles lord it over = them; and=20 those in authority are called benefactors. But not so with you; rather = the=20 greatest among you must become like the youngest, and the leader like = one who=20 serves,=94 Lk 22:25-26). In addition, in the Gospel of Luke, John the = Baptist and=20 Jesus warn that the God of Israel is not an =93exclusive=94 patron. That = is, the=20 Jewish people are not the only possible clients of the God of Israel = (e.g., Lk=20 3:8; 4:25-27).

What happens in = this story,=20 then, is a series of fascinating honor and shame twists and turns. = Jewish elders=20 present the centurion as a man of great honor, who is =93worthy.=94 The = centurion=20 himself then humbles himself =93before=94 Jesus, even to the point of = not feeling=20 =93worthy=94 to come into the presence of Jesus (an amazing amount of = deference for=20 a centurion).[78] = This characterization, of course, elevates the honor of Jesus even = higher. But=20 it is through his humbling of himself as =93not worthy=94 and the = characterization=20 of himself as=97even as a centurion who is an agent of imperial = power=97inferior to=20 Jesus, that the centurion reaches a state of honor far beyond what the = Jewish=20 elders had described. Jesus is =93amazed=94 and praises the centurion: = =93. . . not=20 even in Israel have I found such faith.=94 The real =93miracle,=94 then, = is not the=20 physical healing of the centurion=92s doulos/pais; it instead is the = faith of=20 this centurion (appropriately we hear no command for healing by Jesus, = cf.=20 7:14). Note that Jesus is =93amazed=94 by the centurion=92s =93faith=94 = (7:9). Normally in=20 the narrative of Luke, it is the crowd that is amazed=97and not by = someone=92s=20 faith, but usually by the miracles that Jesus does (cf. 4:22, 36, 5:9, = 26)![79] = Just as the centurion contrasted himself in his sphere of power as = inferior in=20 power to Jesus, so Jesus contrasts the faith of =93Israel=94 as inferior = to this=20 centurion. The fact that Jesus announces this to the =93crowd that = followed him=94=20 reminds readers that this exchange is public=97an important aspect of = honor and=20 shame. It is clear that the =93crowd that followed Jesus=94 is shamed by = this=20 exchange. In contrast, the centurion is a prototype and foreshadowing of = those=20 persons =93who humble themselves=94 and who =93will be exalted=94 (e.g., = 14:11; 18:14;=20 cf. 13:30). The centurion is also similar to other characters in Luke = who are=20 willing to request Jesus=92 help in spite of major = social/cultural/physical=20 barriers. Jesus responds positively to these characters, and each = narrative=20 includes a positive reference to the faith that led them to attempt to = surmount=20 those barriers (e.g., a =93paralyzed man,=94 5:19-20; a =93sinful = woman,=94 7:36-50; a=20 =93woman suffering from a hemorrhage,=94 8:43-48; a Samaritan leper, = 17:11-19; and a=20 blind man, 18:35-43). These characters who overcome barriers become = models of=20 faith for other characters, and, the narrator hopes, for readers.