"I am the true vine and my Father is the vinedresser. He cuts off all of my branches that do not bear fruit. And he prunes those which do bear fruit so that they may produce more. You have already been pruned by the word I have spoken to you. Remain in me, as I remain in you. Just as the branch cannot bear fruit unless it remains on the vine, neither can you if you do not remain in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. S/he who remains in me and I in her, bears much fruit, because you cannot do anything separated from me. But s/he who does not remain in me is like the branch that is thrown away and dries up; then it is gathered up, thrown on the fire and burns. If you remain in me and my words remaining you, ask what you wish and you will have it. My Father's glory is in your producing abundant fruit, and in this way be my disciples.

Acts 9: 26-31

A reading of Acts should differentiate the underlying historical tradition from what motivates "Luke". The historical event: after his conversion and time in Damascus, "Luke" presents Paul on a journey to Jerusalem. He omits, or is unaware of his time in Arabia. The conversion of the persecutor is not easy to accept and suspicion causes the majority not to believe in the "new Paul". The intervention of Barnabas makes sense due to his closeness to Paul, mentioned not only in Acts but also in Paul (1 Cor 9:6, Gal 2:1,9,13 and see Col 4:10) This friendship with Stephen, in addition, allows for new light to be shed on the presence of Stephen in Acts, since he is held up from the beginning as a model after selling his land and placing the money at the apostles' feet (4:36)

It is not clear if the one who tells how he saw the Lord on the road is Barnabas (which would match the speech) or Paul himself (which matches the events): both things are literarily possible. The confrontation with the Hellenists, in other words, Greek-speaking Jews, is like what happened with Stephen (see 6:9), who in Acts seem to be Paul's most formidable adversaries. That's why they decide to kill him, and "the brothers"-the Christian Jews in Jerusalem decide to make him go to Tarsus, his homeland, in order to save his life. This does not contradict Paul's writings (Gal 1: 21), which make it seem probable. "Luke" adds a short summary on "peace" and the growth of the communities accompanied by the Holy Spirit.

Let's look at some theological details: conversion meant a total life change for Paul. It's true that "Luke" never calls him an apostle but does not hesitate to assure us that he "saw the Lord" (v.27), making him a true witness of the resurrected one. In addition, he tells us that Paul spent time with the Apostles and "preached valiantly in the name of the Lord". From this, we begin to see the expansion of the Gospel beyond "Judea, Galilee and Samaria (v.31) and reaching Asia (v.30). But this preaching brings with it conflict; like Stephen, he argues with the Hellenists and they begin to plan his death. Just as Stephen is martyred in a remarkable parallel to Jesus (note the similarities between the trial and death of Jesus in Luke and that of Stephen in Acts), Paul also begins to be condemned to death, ending up, also like Jesus' death, in a process of trial, courts, etc...Converting to Jesus, Paul's fate will be the same as his Master's.

Psalm 21: 26-28,30,32

A psalm of lamentation includes praise, almost as a separate and different hymn. The community is gathered together for a sacrifice of communion in which the celebrant shares and celebrates with the poor, publicly showing solidarity and communion with the people. This action lets everyone see the work of God which at the beginning seemed distant (vs.2,12,20), but is now close (v.25) to the poor and weak, which will make the powerful of the earth recognize it and tell of its justice. The experience of shared life and solidarity in communion with the poor so that they may be satisfied, is preached to the pagans in an alternative society of brothers and sisters that God wishes for his community. This is evident in the liturgical celebration of the offering shared with the poor.

I John 3: 18-24

It seems that a large group in John's community proposed a non-incarnate spirituality, stemming from a distorted reading of the Gospel. The intention of the author of the letter is to show them how they should understand many misinterpretations of the Gospel. In this case, he indicates that love is something that is demonstrated concretely; that it is not merely "talk" but something put into practice. We're not far from other Jewish apocryphal writings, such as Gad's Testament: "Now, my children, may each one love his brother; strip hatred from your hearts, loving one another with deeds, words and thoughts" (6,1).

The relationship between "commandment" and "receive whatever we ask" should be understood in the dynamic of love, of raising a family, like what is shown in the Q tradition: "If you, then, being evil, know how to give good things to your children, how much more will your Father (who is in heaven) give good things to those who ask for them!" (Matt. 7: 11)

The commandment, in this case, is defined as "believe" and "love", if we look at it in the light of the Gospel. There Jesus had said: On that day, you will ask in my name and I tell you I will not beseech my Father for you because the Father himself loves you since you love me and believe that I came from God (16,27). This encounter of love produces a mutual "presence", and a knowledge that it doesn't come from "theory" but from love put into practice, the presence among us of the Paraclete. (for greater depth, see what we follows in speaking of the Gospel).

John 15: 1-8 I am the vine, you are the branches

The scholars do not agree on whether this image should be placed in the category of parable or if it is an allegory. There are elements of both. Although both are expressed by the Hebrew word, "mashal", it is not clear how we should understand it. If it is an allegory, we should look for meaning in every reference. And so, what would the "pruning" be? What is "cutting"? And the "fire"? If it is a parable, we should look for the most important element at the end. In this case, it would be the fruit, but at more than one spot it seems that what's most important is "remaining on" the plant. This is the only way to bear those fruits, which is certainly what is hoped for.

The idea that Jesus would present himself as a vine seems very important. We again find an "I am" preached, as he had been the living water, life bread, light of the world, noble shepherd, the sheep's gate, the resurrection and the life, the way to truth. As we can see, most of the sermons of "I am" are vital elements of existence: water, light, bread, the vine, the path, the gate. Sometimes they are also loaded with symbolism in Israel: the shepherd, the vine; sometimes they are accompanied by sermons that give them a new meaning: "alive", "noble", "true". We know that John has written "so you may believe" (20:31). And that's why he uses his gospel to reveal Jesus to us, and to show him, in a veiled way at first, through signs (ch.1-12) and later openly, in his glory (ch. 13-20). In this revealing context, the discourses that usually come after a sign should be highlighted (Bultmann called them the "revelation discourses"). In them the hidden elements in the sign are explained; Jesus manifests himself in them, shedding light on what is not visible, with an "I am" sermon. For example, after multiplying the loaves, he makes clear that this is not "for food" but as a sign (see 6:26). So that we can understand it, he tells us "I am the living bread". The "I am's" then indicate John's attempts to reveal Jesus. In this case, he says to us "I am" the vine.

What is the vine? Of course it is a plant that produces grapes, but that isn't what Jesus wants to underscore. Often in the Old Testament, the vine represents the people of Israel (see Ho 10: 1, Ps 79: 9-12; Jr 2:21, Ezk 17: 1-10, 19:10, and above all, Is 5: 1-8; also see Qo 6: 11, 7: 13). The problem with this vine is its lack of fruit; that's where Jesus takes this (or that of the fig tree; see Jr 8:13; Jl 1:7, Matt 21: 19-21; or of the olive tree; see Psalm 52:10, Ho 14: 5-8, and the interesting parable of Jg 9: 7-16). In each case, the fruits are what matter, very evident in the Is 5 text, and its rereading in the allegorized parable of the "wicked husbandman" (Matt 21: 33-41, also 20: 1-16; 21: 28-32). The lack of fruit or bad fruit are subject of concern for the owner of the vine, who is God. That's when it is indicated that the vine is "true". Characteristic of the entire Gospel, John presents a Jesus summarizing in himself all the ancient things connected to God: the purification vessels, the liturgical feasts, the Temple, the paschal Lamb...here he shows us Jesus being the true people of God.

The "truth" in John is a very interesting theme to point out. While the Greeks understand truth as something "in accord with reality", for biblical mentality, truth is a synonym of fidelity, loyalty. It's more on the order of praxis than of theory. The vine is true in the measure that it responds to what is expected of it. In addition, truth is the opposite of lies, which is treason, infidelity. The devil is called the "father of lies", which is "what comes out of him" (8:44) and therefore is a murderer. His fruit is death. This begins to lay the groundwork for the theme of the fruits, one which will only be explained much later on. It's interesting that John explains from the beginning what he means by the vine, the vinedresser, shoots, branch but says nothing about the fruits. But this is understandable because the intent of the entire first part is the importance of "remaining", while he goes back to the importance of the fruits after having highlighted it. Of course, you cannot bear fruit without "remaining", and-in addition-if it doesn't bear fruit, the branch is cut off, making it cease to "remain".

We can see that this whole first part focuses more on the need to "remain". Let's look at this more closely:

"Remain in" is one of John's favorite ways (also in 1 John) to indicate a communion between people who love one another, such as between the Father and the Son, or between the Son and Christians. We see that it refers to a deep union, not in the mystical sense of the word but rather an experiential one: it leads one to a life of love (15:10; 1 Jn 4: 12-16), faces the world (1 Jn 2: 16-17) and tries to bear fruit (15:5). The interrelation is deep (see 6:56; 14: 10-11, 15:5) and in the case of the believer and Christ it relates to the bread of life, to the word, and helps to understand the unity that exists between the Father and the Son and between the Son and the believer (see Jn 17:11,21,23). That's why two other elements in the use of this verb are very interesting. In 9:41 he addresses those who say, "We see", and something horrible is said about them: "their sin remains". The persistent refusal to believe produces none other than a relationship with sin. The other instance occurs through its opposite, love. In 15:16, we followers of Jesus are chosen to bear fruit, and through this fruit "remaining" is evident. It's not as easy as just saying that it is a lasting fruit, it is a fruit of communion, a divine fruit. Lastly, we see that at the end of the Gospel, the verb "remain" is used for the Beloved Disciple; the reference is to his "remaining" till the end. That close unity with Jesus until he returns is also typical therefore, of the model Disciple, of those of us who must follow that example. We should also not overlook that this mutual interrelation "I in him, him in me" seems to have a dynamic similar to that of the Old Testament covenant. (see Jr 31:33, Ezk 36:26-27).

The fruits are eluded to from the start, although as we said, the accent is placed for now on the branches and their remaining joined to the vine.

"Glorification" is the carrying out of God's will, the manifestation of his project. The Father's will is evident in the great amount of fruit that the branches that "remain" on the vine can produce, and they can remain because these words which originate with the Father (see 14;10) also remain. The close mutual relationship is pointed out and we are ready to dwell on the fruits.

Reflection

Jesus shows us a traditional image. It's not exactly a parable, nor an allegory, as some wonder. From the first moment we are told what these three images refer to: the vine is Jesus, the vinedresser is the Father and the branches are the listeners. Only the fruits remain without identification, being explained only at the end. But the image of the vine-which apparently is planted to obtain fruit-and the branches, placed the first emphasis on their need to be part of the plant in order to bear fruit. All of this is expressed in a verb that is very important for John: "remain in".

Being separated from Christ makes no sense. Without Him, there is no true life, no true projects of hope that make sense. Only by being united to Him, "remaining in" Him, will it be possible to bear fruit and place ourselves before God. Without Jesus we are like the branch of a tree once it's cut: it cannot give fruit. It definitely cannot, and its inexorable destiny is the fire. In the logic of the image, the fruit does not depend on us but on our being part of a vine. It is not our own abilities, our strengths that will produce fruit in this season; producing fruit depends exclusively on a state of belonging, of a communion, an integration. It's not because of us but rather due to the strength that this permanence gives to something that is God's (a people), and has the guarantee of His strength and vitality. Only God matters in this "story of tress, branches and fruit".

Often in the Old Testament, the people of God is compared to a vine (see Is 5:1-7) -and sometimes to a fig tree, too-but this people is a vine that bore sour grapes instead of the expected fruit. In the synoptic gospels, the lack of good fruit led Jesus to use the image of the vine to talk about a change in the administrators of the vine (see Matt 21:28-46) or of the fig tree that dries up due to not bearing fruit. John, on the other hand, summarizes everything, as he usually does, in the person of Christ. He is the vine, to be very clear, is defined here as "true": we will only be his People by being united to Him; the only way to be able to bear fruit.

We see, then, that the Gospel places us before two aspects of one same reality: to be united to Christ and also to bear fruit. You cannot bear fruit without "remaining in" Him, and you do not "remain in" Him without "bearing fruit" because the vinedresser prunes the barren branches, thus losing the state of "remaining".

Life comes to us, therefore, by being united to Jesus; it's a life that comes from within and in turn, generates more life outwards ("fruit" in the image that John develops). And just like wine ("fruit of the vine and of peoples' work"), this usually results in joy. Joy and life go hand in hand: life is celebrated in joy; joy is a strong symbol of life. All that is the Father's glory, and it is there that he makes himself present.

Many times we hear that it is possible to be a Christian without the Church-and even without Christ!--. We do not deny the good will of those who live separated from Christ, nor the good fruits, at least-in many cases-better fruits than those that the so-called "average Christian" gives-sometimes a synonym for a "mediocre Christian". It would be naïve, false, arrogant and even sectarian to deny it. We're just (just?) saying that for those of us who say we are united to Christ-which is nothing other than being "Christians"-our life, our fruits, must be characterized by the same life and the same fruits as Christ. In the meantime, we will keep hearing criticisms of the Church, which we must listen to in shame and with bowed heads, due to the lack of fruit, or because of fruit that is not exactly of life and love but rather the complete opposite. Just as the first vine was taken away from a group-according to Matthew-so that another would bear fruit in due time, the vine, which is called "true" here, can confront us with our "non- truth", with lies, as serious in John as to even be demonic. Meanwhile, many of us will keep trying to fill our lives with superficialities that help us evade reality, because only when wine comes from the true vine, will true joy also come, and even truer life will come. But-on the other hand-when we followers of Jesus know how to bear true fruit of the true vine, then joy will be immense. Because these fruits "will remain", and the wine of joy will be transformed into a feast for all.