|
FINDINGS VI By Harry T. Cook
Proper 20 - B - September 20, 2015
Mark 9: 30-37
(Jeremiah 11: 18-20; Psalm 54; James 3: 13-4:3, 7-8a)
 | |
Harry T. Cook
|
By Harry T. Cook
9/14/15
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 or always 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.
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 CE Markan 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 later Markan 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 εν τη οικια at 9:33 can be rendered "at home" and or "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 διακονος - attendant 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 which one 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 CE Markan 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.
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 being 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 (μαρτυς) 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.
|
