and toll collectors who recognized their sins and obtain the mercy of God gave honor to the justice of God by recognizing the baptismal requirement as a condition for entry into the messianic kingdom.122 Despite the opposition, John and Jesus are justified by all the children of wisdom, i.e., those who have recognized and acknowledged the wisdom of God.123 Schanz proposes that by substituting Matthew’s phrase “the works” (11:19) by “all her children” (7:35) Luke has gone beyond the earlier evangelist to stress the inclusion of all the faithful disciples in the kingdom of God in opposition to the Pharisees whose admittance is not contemplated.
With an acknowledgement of the notorious difficulty that the passage has posed since antiquity, Marie Joseph Lagrange argues against what he considers the most radical opinion of his time, i.e., that John is questioning here for the first time whether Jesus might be the Messiah.124 According to Lagrange, such a claim would be contrary to the thought of the evangelist, who had previously professed the greatness of Jesus. Even the dialogue between the disciples of John and Jesus suggests that the Baptist must have had previously some sort of messianic expectation of Jesus. For Lagrange, the doubt of John dealt rather with what type of Messiah he had hoped for.125 The question of John denotes that he was impatient with Jesus’ messianism, and the episode reflects the historical difficulty that was entailed for the Baptist to understand the mission of Jesus: “Nous avons ici une leçon sur la difficulté—toujours actuelle—de comprendre l’œuvre de Jésus.”126
Although for Lagrange it is possible that Jesus’ praise of John could have been delivered in different historical circumstances, he accepts the integrity of the discourse because nothing here indicates a change of situation. The point of the speech is not so much to praise John as to correct the errors concerning his role. Despite his greatness, the role of the Baptist is subordinated to the role of Jesus. The ancient order is inferior to the new, and John is less than the members of the kingdom. His exclusion from the kingdom is not a matter of sanctity but of historical circumstance, and Jesus does not reproach him for this.127 In commenting on the parable of the children in the marketplace, Langrange discusses the possibility of interpreting it either as an allegory or a simple comparison. In either case the parable results in an indictment against the Pharisees and the scholars of the Law. They have refused the baptism of John and have followed their own ideas. But the wisdom of God disposed that his baptism would prepare for the kingdom inaugurated by Jesus and that those who have been docile to the plan would be the true children of wisdom.128
In his commentary on Luke, Alfred Plummer regards the question posed by John’s delegation as a sign of impatience.129 For Plummer the Baptist was probably disappointed by the lack of progress shown by Jesus or by his failure to act more decisively against Herod and Herodias. Jesus’ ministry had become for the Baptist a cause of stumbling. Through his mighty works and reply, Jesus rebukes as well as encourages the Baptist to overcome this temptation.130 Plummer considers Jesus’ comments about the Baptist as a “panegyric” similar to a “funeral oration.” But despite the high praise, Jesus subordinates the Baptist to the members of the kingdom of God. Plummer regards 7:29–30 not as a parenthetical remark of the evangelist but as a statement of Jesus that contrasts the different ways in which the people and the hierarchy received the preaching of the Baptist.131 He attributes the complaints of the children in the marketplace at the end of the pericope to the Jews, who on the one hand wish the Baptist to ease his severity and on the other want Jesus to be more sober.132 Despite the rejection of the Jews, a faithful minority has welcomed the wisdom of God in the message of the Baptist and Jesus.
Although for Alfred Loisy the Baptist’s question in Luke 7:19 could reflect John’s original preaching, the designation “the one who is to come” is almost a sacramental formula that denotes the secondary character of the report.133 The response to the delegation of the Baptist is a redactional fiction: “Mais la notice n’en est pas moins, au point de vue rédactionnel, une interpolation, au point de vue historique une pure fiction.”134 The text reflects the struggle among the factions of the Baptist and Jesus. Each verse represents what each sectarian group claimed to have heard from its hero.135 Thus, Jesus’ speech about the Baptist is completely neutralized by an apologetic interest. In it one can find the Christian thesis regarding the inauguration of the kingdom of God by Jesus opposing the thesis of the Johannine circle concerning the eminent role of the Baptist.136 Likewise, the verses that deal with the way in which the preaching of John was received by Pharisees and publicans (7:29–30) reflect the Christian community’s apologetic concern for justifying the role of John.137 The parable of the children in the marketplace is a retrospective apologetic look at the role of John and Jesus made by the Christian tradition against the Jews.
Heinz Schürmann’s commentary on Luke represents another example of the passage’s interpretation. Schürmann examines a diversity of proposals regarding the integrity and the composition of the pericope and makes a host of redaction-critical observations. He notes that in the acts of compassion of Jesus as well as in the proclamation of his message, the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled and the eschatological visitation of God comes to pass.138 The answer of Jesus, in which the narrator and the community become one, accomplishes a missionary task by affirming all those who recognized the Baptist as a messenger of God.139 In connection with Luke 3:16, the question serves to clarify whether the Baptist’s eager expectation is now fulfilled. For Schürmann the passage witnesses to a conflict that originates from the supernatural-eschatological picture of a savior and judge vis-à-vis the historic appearance of Jesus.140 The redaction of Luke clarifies the messianic and eschatological character of the wonders of Jesus. The paradox of the historical/eschatological Messiah, created by the proclamation/expectation of the Baptist, is highlighted by the possibility of the “scandal” in the final warning. This warning manifests the difficulty of the question.141
According to Schürmann the narrative is missionary: it tries to promote the significance of the ministry and preaching of Jesus as well as his eschatological message of jubilation.142 The answer is a kind of “propaganda” evidently directed at the circle of the Baptist’s followers, who had not yet accepted the message of Jesus. Schürmann speculates about the historical circumstances that underlay the pericope.143 He views the second part of Jesus’ testimony about the Baptist (7:28) as a later addition, formulated by the post-Easter community, aimed at discouraging the misinterpretation that believers should remain simply as disciples of John—salvation is only available through Jesus.144 Schürmann regards 7:29–30 as a Lagebericht about the success and failure of God over Israel. The verses support the following parable by suggesting that the official representatives of the
