FINDINGS II
Proper
20- B - September 20, 2009
Mark 9: 30-37
(Jeremiah
11: 18-20; Psalm 54; James 3: 13-4:3, 7-8a-12)
 By Harry T. Cook
9/14/09
RUBRIC
Where one is going and for what purpose are two things that
one ought to know about himself or herself. Where possible it is also nice to
know what might happen as a result of going wherever it is to do whatever is
purposed. It is not necessary always nor is it helpful to tell all that to
others, being better in most cases just to go and do and take the consequences
of having gone and having done. If one does tell and if the destination,
purpose and possible consequences turn out to be unpleasant news, there is
always the possibility that those to whom it is vouchsafed will be ill-equipped
to hear it. -- That's one dynamic at work in the passage from Mark in this
proper.
The other concerns a problem that frequently arises in group
or community life as its members quarrel about who is most or more important
than the rest and whatever that would turn out to mean in material terms. Such
quarrels can at the worst escalate into clan or tribal warfare and at the least
consume a lot of valuable time and energy that could be spent on far more
effective and lasting enterprises.
WORKSHOP
The journey depicted at the beginning of this passage (9:30)
seems to have been made in secret as an occasion for Jesus to try once again to
explain to his close friends what was coming. In the immediate post- 70 C.E.
Marcan communities, the predictions of suffering and death would have been
heard as applying to those communities themselves, so ever present were powers
that would undo their delicate fabric. But just as the disciples are shown to
be clueless about all that at 9:32, and, perhaps, on the edge of bolting
because "they did not understand what he was saying," so the Marcan communities
may have experienced just such uncertainty and, as 9:32b suggests, fear.
The journey of 9:30 had as its destination Capernaum,
clearly a central location for the early Jesus fellowship. The translation of
9:33 can be rendered at the most "at home" and at the least "inside" the house.
It seems that Mark means to say that in some way or another, Jesus and his
friends were "at home." And the privacy of home is the venue for Jesus'
question at 9:33b, "What was the big discussion as we were walking along?" A
contemporary reaction to that question might well be to assume it was
rhetorical, that Jesus would have already known what was the subject of their
conversation, viz., which amongst them was the greatest.
Yet, as authorities on First Century Mediterranean culture
remind us, it was common that when an acknowledged master or teacher and his
followers were moving from Point A. to Point B., it was customary that the
teacher walked alone in front of the ranks, with followers in the rear. So
maybe Mark imagined that Jesus really didn't know what all the chatter had been
about. Or maybe it was predictable, because Mark in the very next verse depicts
Jesus admonishing the 12 that the one who would be "first" or "greatest" must, in
fact, be a "diakonos," or servant.
Subsequent eras in the life of Christianity and the church
have more than amply demonstrated that there have ever been those who decide
that their office or perceived gifts entitle them to precedence. But the issue
in this passage seems to have gone beyond the concern of who it was among those
of the inner circle who thought himself greater. At 9:36 Mark depicts Jesus
bringing a child (of indeterminate age) into the center of the center of the
group and, taking the child into
some kind of intimate embrace, says, "Whoever receives one such child in my
name receives me
. . ." (9:37a).
Several commentators as well as an informed and commonsense
reading of this passage suggest that what is being talked about is a situation
in the early post-70 C.E. Marcan communities into which neophytes have been
drawn, perhaps Gentiles out of a non-Jewish milieu to whom much of the history
and tradition of the Jews to date - and even nascent Jesus Judaism - were a
mystery. The sense of the passage is that such persons deserve to be treated as
children of tender years and not overlooked or undervalued.
Every congregation of which this exegete has ever known has
been afflicted by the "old guard syndrome" whereby "how we've always done it" and
"how we've always been" has stifled growth and effectiveness. The idea of 9:37
is that the uncomplicated reception of new recruits is not to be re-complicated
by issues of perceived seniority, and that the glad welcome of the neophyte is
to be equated with receiving The Leader himself.
HOMILETIC COMMENTARY
Can you imagine what the Christian church might look like in
the early 21st Century had the burden of this passage been understood or taken
seriously by enough people over enough time?
"Power trip" is the phrase that comes to mind. I suppose it
is unrealistic to think that a human institution could behave other than the
human beings who are a part of it are by nature wont to behave, that it could
proceed apart from human nature. The great convulsions of human history have
been caused by violent reaches for power and by its irresponsible exercise.
Augustus had to be a divine-human "Caesar." Hitler had to be the unquestioned f�hrer. Mao was a
self-appointed god. Many have attempted to follow in their train.
In a social microcosm, the unwarranted reach for power can
be anything from annoying to destructive of relationships. All too familiar is
the so-called "control freak" whose behavior is a curse upon all whom it
affects. Its opposite need not be abject humility, either. A martyr ("martus,"
in Greek) is a "witness," not a doormat.
What a church or any intentional assemblage of human beings
needs is a greater number of people who know who they are, where they are going
and why and who pay little attention to which of them is the greatest among
them because they realize that such an issue is entirely beside the point. It's
called emotional stability at the individual level and trust on the group
level. Any human organization that spends its efforts on power struggles is
doomed to failure.
The church, if it takes the gospel seriously, treads a
perilous way because it tries to embody the ethical wisdom attributed to Jesus
-- the living out of such wisdom requiring passive resistance ("turn the other
cheek"), manifest risk ("love your enemy"), unqualified charity ("give up your
shirt as well as your coat"), infinite patience ("forgive as often as
required") and intensive discipline ("treat others as you would be treated").
Power struggles are incompatible with such a mission.
| |
