given that the Gospel of John speaks of Jesus having “brothers” (2:12; 7:2–5, 10).10 One would think that Jesus’ mother is not alone in the world. She has other sons, not to mention the sister at her side at this moment. She has no need of relatives or kin, but now, in addition to those blood kin she already has, she receives another son—one who becomes her son because he is the beloved of her dying son. She is being charged with a responsibility here: being mother to this man for the sake of his lover who was (one of) her son(s).
The beloved thus receives a mother and in this way becomes the son of Jesus’ mother. She adopts him first (as a parent must do) and then he adopts her.
The episode concludes that the beloved did in fact take her as his mother. The passage often appears translated as “took her to his home,” but “home” is not found in the text. The word is added by the translator. He took her “into his own” is more literal. But specifying home or family or anything of the kind here is not necessary. According to the account, he indeed accepted the adoptive relationship, which began “from that hour.”
“That hour” is the hour of Jesus’ death. Thus the relationship between the beloved and the mother of Jesus begins from the death of Jesus. While before their relationship had been to Jesus, now it is to one another. The grief of the mother for (one of) her son(s) and the grief of the beloved for the man who loved him are to find consolation in their care for one another.
This scene is also consistent with what we noticed before concerning Jesus’ relation to the disciple he loved, namely, that it was not clandestine. The relationship was apparent to those people who knew Jesus best.
But why should such a domestic scene be recorded here at this climactic moment in the Gospel? We have to deal with this question again in connection with all the texts concerning the beloved. Here the text itself suggests that the event is recorded because the beloved said it happened and that his testimony was accepted by the writer(s) of the narrative.
The beloved is here also for the first time identified as a source for the recollections that serve as the basis of the narrative (19:35). Specifically what the beloved witnesses is that Jesus’ legs were not broken but that his side was pierced. This account is regarded by the narrator(s) as consistent with Scripture (19:36–37). But behind this fact is the even more important one that Jesus really and truly died. The beloved is certainly not the only witness to this fact, but he is a witness.
But another and more important reason exists for why the episode between Jesus, his mother, and his beloved may be recorded in connection with the account of Jesus’ execution. One of the themes of this Gospel is that the “Word became flesh.” Indeed, on account of the importance of this theme, John’s Gospel came to be accepted as an antidote to gnosticism.11 That Jesus really died was important for countering gnostic and docetic tendencies in the early church. The death of Jesus according to the flesh is the culmination of the incarnation (en-fleshing) of the Word. The scene of his death then is accentuated by the presence of his mother according to the flesh and of Jesus’ beloved according to the flesh. The presence of Jesus’ mother (who is certainly not regarded as an exemplary disciple) and the presence of Jesus’ beloved (who is also not singled out as a model disciple) underscore the bodily reality that is crucial for the death of Jesus as well.
Put another way, the love that is so often the theme of this Gospel is not only “spiritual”; it is also physical, just as the death of Jesus (or his incarnation) is not only a theological symbol but also a physical, bodily reality.
In this way also, the scene at the cross connects back to the scene at the meal where we first encountered the beloved and where his relation to Jesus was marked precisely by physical, bodily intimacy.
The Tomb
The episode of the tomb does not add a great deal to our hypothesis concerning the nature of the relationship between Jesus and the beloved. Nothing here is inconsistent with the view that theirs was an erotic friendship. But because Jesus himself is not present, little in the tomb account supplements the nature of their relationship either.
The main figure in the account of the empty tomb is Mary of Magdala, whom we first met by name as a witness to Jesus’ execution (19:25). She finds the tomb empty, and she is the one who first brings word of this event to the others. Although Peter and the beloved come running to the tomb and enter it, she rather than they encounter Jesus here.12
The hypothesis of an erotic friendship between Jesus and his beloved disciple at least serves to clarify the text and to “flesh out” some of the details of that relationship.
We notice first that Mary finds the beloved and Peter together. In the next chapter, we see that this piece of circumstantial evidence supports, though does not require, the view that the beloved is Andrew, Peter’s brother. Whether or not they are brothers, they are clearly at least companions. The supposition that Jesus’ relation to the beloved was an erotic one makes the relationship between Peter and the beloved more intelligible. According to the text, each has particular reasons to seek out the other’s companionship. The beloved has witnessed the death of Jesus. He may be found here seeking consolation. Peter has denied one he followed and loved. Who else to turn to in order to unburden himself and seek forgiveness than the one who was the beloved of the one he had denied?
The race to the tomb tells us that the beloved is faster but that he waits for Peter before going in. One could suppose that he is faster because he is younger. One might suppose that he waits for Peter because here, as elsewhere, Peter is represented as the boldest (despite his cowardice at the trial).13 One may suppose that the loved one hesitates also because he is still traumatized by the sight of the mangled bleeding corpse of his lover only some hours before.
In any case, Peter enters first and sees the grave clothes. The beloved then also enters (seeing no disfigured body) and sees and believes.
Obviously the beloved is by no means the sole witness. Mary is the first, followed by Peter, and then the beloved. Thus the episode does not serve to establish the peculiar authority of the beloved, only his personal status as the beloved.
While the beloved believed, he is not necessarily exemplary of subsequent faith. Rather his status serves to make intelligible his reserve at the entrance to the tomb. The lover is dead, and nothing more was to be expected of him since “they did not yet know the writing that he must rise from the dead.” What then is the object of this “belief”? Thus far simply that the body is not in the tomb. Mary supposes that the body has been stolen or hidden (vv. 11–15).14
Even if, on the basis of the empty tomb, we supposed that the beloved “believed” that Jesus had risen from the dead, this status would not make him a paradigm for the faith of the church which is subsequently identified, in the episode with Thomas, as the believing that proceeds without having seen (20:29).
The episode at the tomb serves to confirm that the beloved is neither an independent source of authority in the church nor a representative of the church as such but is a particular disciple.15 The beloved disciple appears to have a noncompetitive relationship with Peter, the leader of the disciples. The final scene of the narrative confirms this.
Fishfry
We come now to the final episode of the Gospel of John. All of chapter 21 is concerned with a final resurrection appearance of Jesus.16 Peter and several of his friends, a group we later learn includes the beloved, go fishing. A mysterious stranger gives them instructions from the shore concerning the placement
