gregoryjenks

Author: Gregory C. Jenks

  • Pentecost 22B (28 October 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Job 42:1-6, 10-17 and Psalm 34:1-8
    • Hebrews 7:23-28
    • Mark 10:46-52

     

    First Reading: Job’s fortunes restored

    This week the RCL completes its series of readings from the book of Job.

    There is no intellectual resolution to the questions posed by Job’s undeserved suffering, but the narrative provides a kind of “they lived happily ever afterwards” ending for the tale.

    • 42:1-6 provides the final exchange between Job and God. Job seems to acknowledge that it is sufficient for him to embrace his own condition as a mortal. He relinquishes any claim to vindication and withdraws his demands for an explanation from God. It is enough to have a proper sense of his own place in the divine economy. Religion itself almost disappears in this resolution. Job stands in the presence of the Holy Other, and abandons any claims (religious or moral) on the Sacred. Simply to be a creature of this God is enough.
    • 42:7-9 portrays God rebuking the friends. They have not represented God accurately in the discourse and are advised to seek Job’s intercession on their behalf:

    After the Lord had spoken these words to Job, the Lord said to Eliphaz the Temanite: “My wrath is kindled against you and against your two friends; for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has. 8Now therefore take seven bulls and seven rams, and go to my servant Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and my servant Job shall pray for you, for I will accept his prayer not to deal with you according to your folly; for you have not spoken of me what is right, as my servant Job has done.” 9So Eliphaz the Temanite and Bildad the Shuhite and Zophar the Naamathite went and did what the Lord had told them; and the Lord accepted Job’s prayer.

    • 42:10-17 rounds off the tale with a description of Job’s fortunate life being restored, including new children and a long life. The fairy tale quality of this ending may distract us from an interesting theological issue. The community whose values are enshrined in this ancient classic was apparently quite able to imagine an entirely satisfying and meaningful human existence without any recourse to the idea of life after death. A rich and full life, lived in the company of one’s neighbors and loved ones, has not been fully appreciated by Christians. The Christian ideal of a truly blessed life has tended to focus much more on divine blessing after death, rather than on material and psychological wellbeing in this life. As contemporary Christian belief is losing its focus on life after death as the chief benefit and value in religion, the simpler focus of the biblical community responsible for Job may provide the stimulus to seek a holistic vision of human existence as part of the complex web of life on our planet and within the cosmos.

    While Christians may not wish to jettison belief in life beyond death, we may wish to set such a belief within a more robust appreciation of life before death.

     

    Second Reading: Jesus as priest

    The major western lectionaries continue their reading of Hebrews this week:

    • RC: Heb 5:1-6
    • ECUSA: Heb 5:12-6:1,9-12
    • RCL: Heb 7:23-28

    These selections all come from the central section of Hebrews (4:14-10:31) with its focus on Jesus as the eternal high priest:

    4:14-5:10 Christ as “a great high priest”
    5:11-6:20 Appeal for steadfast hope (“an anchor for the soul”)
    7:1-28 Melchizedek as a superior order of priesthood
    8:1-6 Jesus as the “more excellent” priest seated in divine glory
    8:7-13 The new (and “better”) covenant mediated by Jesus
    9:1-10 The limited and symbolic character of the tabernacle
    9:11-28 Christ’s priestly action as “priest and victim”
    10:1-18 Christ’s offering of himself “once for all”
    10:19-31 Concluding appeal and warnings

    This way of interpreting Jesus is distinctive within the NT:

    • The Synoptic tradition (Mark, Matthew, Luke-Acts) does not give any ground for thinking that Jesus was from priestly circles, although Luke turns John the Baptist into both a cousin of Jesus and the son of a priest from the Jerusalem temple. The Pauline writings use a considerable array of images and categories to express the significance of Jesus, but do not draw on priestly themes. The Johannine communities shared Hebrews interest in Jesus’ divinity, but found no need to employ priesthood as the title “Son” seemed to meet their needs.
    • The nearest we come to Hebrews seems to be 1Peter where we find some themes derived from the sacrificial cult are applied to both Jesus and the Christian:

    Christians are to be sprinkled with the blood of Jesus (1Pet 1:2)
    Christ is like a lamb without defect or blemish (1Pet 1:20)
    Christians are fashioned into a royal priesthood offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God (1Pet 2:5,9)
    Jesus suffered abuse and hardship in an exemplary manner (1Pet 2:20-24)
    Christ suffered in the flesh (1Pet 4:1)
    Christ has entered into heaven and is at the right hand of God with the angels (1Pet 3:22)

    It seems that a case could be made that Hebrews and 1Peter share much the same theological outlook, and yet there is not the slightest hint in 1Peter that Jesus was (or could be imagined as) a Jewish priest.

    Hebrews perhaps acknowledges the imaginative leap involved when it assigns Jesus to the mythical priestly order of Melchizedek, and makes not the slightest attempt to assert his physical descent from Levi. Indeed, making a virtue of necessity, Hebrews argues for the supremacy of the pre-Torah priesthood of Melchizedek over Israel’s traditional priestly pedigree.

    Creative spiritual imagination is at work here. In our own time so much effort has been invested in determining precisely what Jesus “actually said” and what events “really happened.” Hebrews shows us a rather different approach to the questions, Who is Jesus? and, What am I called to do in response to him?

    Is it possible that we have been seduced by the narrative format of the Gospels and have accorded them far more historicity than they require? Perhaps the Gospels, like the Letter to the Hebrews or the Book of Revelation, are better understood as imaginative expressions of what Jesus meant to some of his followers in the 1C?

    Do we honor the sage of Galilee better by treating theological fictions as history, or by fashioning lives and communities around his message?

     

     

    Gospel: Blind Bartimaeus

    The Gospel story of Jesus healing the blind beggar, Bartimaeus, is common to all of the major western lectionaries this weekend.

    This story can be understood as the other end of the extended exploration of the meaning of discipleship created by Mark (8:22-10:52). The Greek word hodos (translated as “way” or “road”) was a code word for “Christianity” (cf. Acts 9:2; 18:25; 19:9,23; 22:4; 24:14,22 and 2Pet 2:2) and occurs several times in this section:

    • 8:27 – “On the road, he started questioning his disciples …”
    • 9:33,34 – “What were you arguing about on the road?”
    • 10:17 – “As he was traveling along the road …”
    • 10:52 – “And right away he regained his sight, and he started following him on the road.”

     

    In the first section of his Gospel, Mark has set up various scenes in which Jesus acts as a person of spiritual power. According to Mark, only the demons recognized his true identity as the hero sent by God to rescue people from the Evil One. Disciples and opponents alike seemed unable to determine his identity and mission.

    The central section stretching from 8:22 to 10:52 provides an opportunity for Mark to present the true meaning of Jesus and, by extension, the authentic character of discipleship. Writing on the other side of 70 CE (when the Romans destroyed the temple), Mark interprets Jesus as the messiah of an empire that has power but exerts no violence. This mother’s son (a paraphrase of “son of man”) comes to give his life away for the sake of others. This mother’s son has no special privileges, not even a safe place to sleep of a night. This mother’s son will drink the cup prepared for him by God, and will be baptized in the ordeal that is his destiny. Those who grasp his identity and are drawn into the mission as disciples will do likewise.

    In the final section of the Gospel (11:1-16:8) Mark sketches the final outcome of that interpretation of Jesus. It is easy to forget that our oldest copies of Mark end the story of Jesus without any Easter appearances. Neither Matthew nor Luke felt able to imitate Mark’s boldness at that point. Mark looked beyond the fate of both Jesus and Jerusalem, and told his readers that Jesus had gone ahead of them to Galilee. They were not to linger around the graveyards of Jerusalem, but to go find Jesus in the places where they had first encountered him; in the communities of the Galilee. Their job was not to protect the relics of the past, but to catch up with Jesus who was already ahead of them and blazing new trails into the future.

     

    In the context of that brilliant literary fiction created by Mark, Bartimaeus has a symbolic role. Here is someone empowered to see Jesus clearly. He immediately follows Jesus “on the road” (Greek: en te hodo). No one else in this central section makes the connection.

    • A blind man at Bethsaida (8:22-26) eventually sees clearly but is sent home
    • Disciples (8:27-9:1) cannot embrace a suffering messiah
    • Transfiguration (9:2-13) does not achieve enlightenment for disciples
    • Disciples have not understood prayer at healing of the mute spirit (9:14-29)
    • Disciples argue over status in the kingdom (9:30-50)
    • Disciples fail to welcome the children (10:13-16)
    • Man with money (10:17-31) fails to become a disciple
    • James and John seek special favors (10:32-45)
    • Bartimaeus regains his sight and becomes a disciple (10:46-52)

    Bartimaeus is part of a very small cast of characters in Mark’s Gospel who actually understood the identity and mission of Jesus. The others include:

    • An unnamed woman who anoints Jesus for burial (14:3-9)
    • Roman officer in charge of the crucifixion (15:39)

     

    Jesus Database

     

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Pentecost 21B (21 October 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Job 38:1-7, (34-41) and (or Isaiah 53:4-12 & Psalm 91:9-16
    • Hebrews 5:1-10
    • Mark 10:35-45

     

    First Reading: God replies to Job

    This week’s excerpt from Job takes us into the long-awaited divine response to Job’s complaint. The speech extends from 38:1 to 42:6, with Job having almost nothing to say in response to God:

    • 38:1-40:2 First divine speech
    • 40:3-5 Job’s first response
    • 40:6-41:34 Second divine speech
    • 42:1-6 Job’s second response

    Job 38 is a fine example of the natural sciences in the late first millennium BCE. We are given a catalogue of cosmic processes and phenomena that were understood as signs of God’s unparalleled power over creation, and all creatures. This is not to be taken as a timeless benchmark for human knowledge of the natural world, but as a conscious drawing on the best current information for theology. The challenge for the contemporary theologian is to make similar use of our own best knowledge, rather than to fight yesterday’s battles in defence of empty castles.

    The divine speech begins with a theophany: God answers out of a whirlwind. This is reminiscent of other biblical theophanies:

    • Exod 3 (Moses at the burning bush)
    • Exod 19 (giving of the Law at Sinai)
    • 1 Kings 19 (Elijah at the cave)
    • 2 Kings 2 (ascension of Elijah)
    • Ezek 1 (chariot vision)
    • Psalm 83, 97, 104, etc
    • Isa 29:6
    • Jer 23:19

    Nahum 1:3-6 may reflect a similar tradition to what we find in Job 38:

    The LORD is slow to anger but great in power, and the LORD will by no means clear the guilty. His way is in whirlwind and storm, and the clouds are the dust of his feet. 1:4 He rebukes the sea and makes it dry, and he dries up all the rivers; Bashan and Carmel wither, and the bloom of Lebanon fades. 1:5 The mountains quake before him, and the hills melt; the earth heaves before him, the world and all who live in it. 1:6 Who can stand before his indignation? Who can endure the heat of his anger? His wrath is poured out like fire, and by him the rocks are broken in pieces.

    The divine speech does not directly address Job’s complaint. His troubles are never explained. It seems sufficient for the author that the clearer vision of God’s reality makes everything else fall into place. The awesome reality of God glimpsed in the splendor of the cosmos does not resolve human questions of meaning and justice. However, a vision (or even a glimpse) of the sacred Other may frame those questions with a sense of our own vulnerable and yet essential place in the web of life. That may suffice to allow us to continue living faithfully even if we never cease to wrestle for both meaning and justice.

     

    Suffering Servant

    The RC and ECUSA lectionaries both draw on Isaiah 53 with its famous description of the suffering servant of Yahweh. This theme will link well with both the reading from Hebrews (a son who learns obedience through suffering) and Mark (can you drink my cup or undergo my baptism?).

    Isaiah 53 is one of a series of “songs” in the second half of the book that seem to describe the community of ancient Israel as a suffering servant, destined for great things and with a mission to illuminate the nations with the light of the sacred Torah.

    There is some debate about the number and exact delineation of these servant songs, but the following passages seem to work with the theme of “servant” as a way to explore the meaning of Israel’s existence:

    • Isa 41:8-16
    • Isa 42:1-9
    • Isa 49:1-6
    • 50:4-11
    • 52:13-53:12
    • 61:1-4

    The four passages underlined are those usually recognized as the Servant Songs of Isaiah.

    Early Christians understood these texts are prophecies of Jesus. While it is not certain that Jesus himself drew on these texts to understand his mission, it is clear that his followers did so. The passage used this week seems closely connected to the Jewish tradition of the innocent victim that shaped the early telling of the passion narrative.

    After many centuries, they continue to evoke the ideal of a non-violent mission to share the divine Torah with all humanity.

     

     

    Second Reading: A high priest in the order of Melchizedek

    The RCL moves to the distinctive representation of Jesus as a priest in Hebrews 5.

    There is no historical basis for the way that this author has re-imagined Jesus in terms that were familiar and significant to himself and his community. Only in Luke’s infancy traditions do we get the slightest hint that Jesus was connected with priestly circles, and then only by inference since his supposed cousin, John the Baptist, was the son of a priest. The twin birth narratives of John and Jesus that we find in Luke 1-2 are clearly the creation of the author and do not provide any reliable information about the social status of Jesus’ family.

    The priestly Jesus of Hebrews is just as much a creative fiction as the well-connected Jesus of Luke-Acts. In Hebrews, Jesus is not simply a priest, but a High Priest; and not merely a human High Priest, but a divine figure in the “order of Melchizedek.”

    There are three passages in Hebrews that develop this link to Melchizedek:

    In the days of his flesh, Jesus offered up prayers and supplications, with loud cries and tears, to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverent submission. Although he was a Son, he learned obedience through what he suffered; and having been made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, having been designated by God a high priest according to the order of Melchizedek … [Heb 5:7-10]

    This “King Melchizedek of Salem, priest of the Most High God, met Abraham as he was returning from defeating the kings and blessed him”; and to him Abraham apportioned “one-tenth of everything.” His name, in the first place, means “king of righteousness”; next he is also king of Salem, that is, “king of peace.” Without father, without mother, without genealogy, having neither beginning of days nor end of life, but resembling the Son of God, he remains a priest forever … [Heb 7:1-3]

    It is even more obvious when another priest arises, resembling Melchizedek, one who has become a priest, not through a legal requirement concerning physical descent, but through the power of an indestructible life. For it is attested of him, “You are a priest forever, according to the order of Melchizedek.” [Heb 7:15-17]

    The origins of this line of thought are to be found in Genesis 14 and Psalm 110:

    And King Melchizedek of Salem brought out bread and wine; he was priest of God Most High.  He blessed him and said, “Blessed be Abram by God Most High, maker of heaven and earth;  and blessed be God Most High, who has delivered your enemies into your hand!” And Abram gave give one tenth of everything. [Gen 14:18–20]

    The LORD has sworn and will not change his mind,
    “You are a priest for ever according to the order of Melchizedek.” [Ps 110:4]

    This rudimentary tradition was elaborated in Jewish texts as diverse as the Qumran scrolls and Philo of Alexandria, extracts from which are available here: Melchizedek.

    Gospel: Status in the kingdom

    The Gospel reading from Mark continues the “master class” in discipleship that is found in Mark 8:31-10:52.

    In this case, the disciples are portrayed as still failing to understand the character of Jesus and their own parts in the Kingdom. Their inability to see beyond opportunities for personal benefit serves as a teaching moment for the narrator.

    Jesus has come with a destiny. He must drink the cup prepared for him, just as others will in their turn. And he must undergo the baptism that is reserved for him and for those who are his disciples.

    The cup symbol will recur in the Last Supper (Mark 14:23-25) and in the solitary prayer vigil in Gethsemane (Mark 14:36). The symbol of Jesus’ baptism (now understood in a metaphorical sense, rather than as an allusion to his baptism by John the Baptist) is less familiar, but presented Mark’s readers with the challenge to remain faithful to their suffering master as they went through their own personal and communal baptisms of suffering.

    Mark then presents a classic text on servant leadership, with repeated use of the term “deacon” —

    whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant [diakonos],
    and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave [doulos] of all.
    For the Son of Man came not to be served [diakonethenai] but to serve [diakonesai],
    and to give his life a ransom for many.

     

    One of the recent signs of new life in the churches has been the recovery and revival of the diaconate as a distinctive and significant ministry. Despite the pious imagination of Hebrews, Jesus was not a priest. He is not even described in the NT as a bishop [episcopos], although he is called a shepherd. Is it possible that the authentic and distinctive Christian ministry role, is neither bishop nor priest, but deacon? This is a role without pretensions to status or power, being defined by its role in preparing for the meal of the gathered community. In the “kingdom of nobodies” that constitutes the empire of God, what better model for leadership?

    Jesus Database

     

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • A faith worth sharing

    During the past week some friends on Facebook were discussing the advertisements that St Francis Theological College in Brisbane has been running on a local radio station. I guess that means the advertisements worked, although I am yet to see if this will translate into new enrolments.

    There were two strands to the discussion.

    First of all, there was the surprise of recent SFC graduates in hearing that radio advertising was being used to promote the academic programs that we offer. This is not a marketing strategy we have used in the past, and people were genuinely surprised at the development.

    The other strand in the discussion expressed negativity towards St Francis College in particular, and to critical religion scholarship more generally, as not having anything life-giving to offer to people who are seeking for meaning in the lives and a greater depth to their own faith. Such criticism is neither new nor surprising in an age of resurgent conservatism.

    But it got me thinking.

    Yes, it was atypical for SFC to advertise on local community radio, and something of an experiment. At the same time, we were very conscious of the need to describe ourselves accurately so that people looking for a more traditional Bible College program did not mistake SFC as offering that kind of experience.

    The briefing of the advertising consultant took some extra time as we worked to find the right words to capture what we wished to say. In the end, the text of our very brief advertisement was as follows:

    Is it your dream to make a POSITIVE change in our rapidly changing world? St Francis Theological College could be your next step to make that change… and push your faith to the next level. St Francis Theological College offers a wide range of courses to equip you for ministry—Biblical Studies, Theology, Ministry Studies and more …  from Certificate to Masters degrees. For course and campus details see StFrancisCollege.com.au 

    Whether or not we succeeded in getting the description right, and irrespective of the enrolment enquiries generated by the advertisement, I want to reflect a little further on the assumption that liberal and progressive expressions of Christianity have no good news to share with people.

    For the purposes of this reflection, I shall use the five hallmarks of progressive Christianity identified by Hal Taussig in his 2006 study of 1,000 progressive faith communities in North America:

    1. Spiritual vitality and expressive worship
    2. An insistence on Christianity with intellectual integrity
    3. Transgression of traditional gender boundaries
    4. Christian commitment without exclusive claims to religious truth
    5. Strong ecological and social justice commitments

    In my view, those five characteristics  constitute an attractive and transformative expression of Christianity. They cut across the traditional boundaries of catholic, evangelical, pentecostal, and liberal Christianity. Ideally, people of faith whose primary identity is Catholic or Evangelical or Pentecostal would find much here that they can endorse as well.

    It is not the individual points but rather their combination into a coherent pattern of discipleship that makes progressive Christianity a distinctive expression of Christian faith in today’s world. This is good news, and it is good news that many parts of the Christian Church need; not to mention the wider community.

    One only has to voice the alternatives to glimpse why this way of being Christian is profoundly good news. Too many expressions of Christianity are characterised by liturgies that no longer speak to and from the human situation, uncritical acceptance of traditional beliefs and practices, deep fear of sexual difference, ugly religious competition, and a failure to care deeply for justice and the environment.

    Progressive Christianity seeks to escape religious naiveté while valuing our own spiritual tradition with its rituals, scriptures, and core values; to engage deeply and passionately with the quest for truth and the search for meaning; to value people for who they are rather than their gender or sexuality; and to participate in the mission of God in shaping a world that is just and sustainable.

    If pushed to reduce Hal Taussig’s five-part description to even simpler terms, I would argue that the heart of Christianity is compassionate generosity. If a single term is needed, then compassion does it for me.

    Jesus is supposed to have said that the health of a tree can be judged by the fruits that it bears. On that test, SFC scores well as a healthy local expression of progressive Christianity. We respect and value the Catholic Anglican tradition that we have received as a legacy from the past, and we welcome Anglicans of other traditions as well as people of any faith and no faith.

    Our goal is that anyone who studies with us grows in their own faith, and increases their capacity to think critically. I rejoice to see among our graduates confident and articulate Evangelicals, confident and articulate Catholics, confident and articulate Progressives, confident and articulate Pentecostals. Our alumni are a diverse lot, and I am proud of them all.

    We have good news to share with anyone who chooses us as a place to pursue their theological studies. We will not tell them what to believe or how to behave. But we shall certainly join them in the adventure of keeping alive the dangerous memory of Jesus and learning from each other how best to shape lives that are compassionate and generous.

  • 2013 Sabeel Global Young Adults Festival

     

    A number of people coming to Bethsaida in 2013 are thinking about participating in the Sabeel International Young Adults Conference which will happen immediately after we finish our time on the dig.

    Preliminary information about that event has now been published by Sabeel:
    2012 Sabeel Global Young Adults Festival

    As you may already have noticed, the event has a new name:
    GLOBAL YOUNG ADULTS FESTIVAL

    The dates are July 1-6, 2013 – but participants are encouraged to arrive the previous day (June 30 – when we are scheduled to arrive in Jerusalem in any case).

    This program will be based in Bethlehem and runs in parallel to the special one week program arranged for us at St George’s College, Jerusalem.

    Remarkably, the cost for the week is just US$500.00 and that includes accommodation, meals, land transport, tips and gratuities.

    The program is described as a celebration of environmental sustainability, economic justice, human rights, and community.

    The theme of the conference is:

    MOVING MOUNTAINS | RE-SHAPING THE WORLD
    Aiming for miracles through creative activism.

    For more information about the Global Young Adults Festival , please contact Sabeel directly at youth@sabeel.org

    If you are between 18 and 35 years of age and interested in taking the Sabeel conference as an alternative to the St George’s College program, please advise Audrey Warren at Mission Travel asap so that we can plan for the appropriate numbers at SGC.

    For those who meet the age requirements and are considering the relative costs as part of their decision, the cost for the St George’s College program is US$1,750 while the Sabeel conference costs US$500.

    Meanwhile, we still have a number of vacancies for the 2013 trip, so please talk about the program to anyone you know who may be interested. We are keen to have a full group of 25 people for 2013.

    Do get back to me if you have any questions about the program.

    Shalom waSalaam.

  • Pentecost 20B (14 October 2012)

    Contents

    [hide]

    Lectionary

    • Job 23:1-9,16-17 and Psalm 22:1-15 (or Amos 5:6-7,10-15 & Psalm 90:12-17)
    • Hebrews 4:12-16
    • Mark 10:17-31

     

    First Reading: Wisdom from Job

    It can be helpful to have some sense of the overall structure of the Book of Job:

    1:1-2:13 – Narrative prologue

    3:1-31:40 – The Dialogue of Job and his friends
    – First Cycle of Speeches (3:1-11.20)
    – Second Cycle of Speeches (12:1-20:29)
    – Third Cycle of Speeches (21:1-28:28)
    – Job’s final summation (29:1-31:40)

    32:1-37:24 – The Speeches of Elihu

    38:1-42:6 – Job’s Dialogue with Yahweh

    42:7-17 – Narrative epilogue

    This week’s RCL first reading picks up part of Job’s “speech” in the third cycle. Here the hero of the tale asserts his confidence that God would vindicate him and yet finds that God seems strangely absent. The passage is a spiritual classic with its sense that the Absent One cannot be produced on demand, and seems sometimes to leave us to our fate. This is not the final position of the Book of Job, nor of the Bible as a whole, but it is interesting to reflect on the integrity of a spiritual text that can face its own worse fears (God cannot be found), name them, and then move beyond them into a sense of the One who is greater than both our questions and our traditional answers.

    The RCL matches this text with Psalm 22, the ancient lament that the Christian author of the passion story would place on the lips of Jesus as he hung on the cross: “My God, my God, why have you abandoned me?”

    While Christians have grown accustomed to reading this psalm through the lens of the cross, perhaps it can be read as a reflection of the Job story — or maybe just the common human experience that God seems so distant, and our own troubles seem to evoke horror and scorn.

    The following links may also be of interest:

     

    Amos 5

    In ECUSA communities, the words of Amos provide a preparation for the Gospel story of the rich young ruler.

    It is interesting that the lectionary planners could not find a prophetic text that demanded obedience to the Ten Commandments in the way that Jesus is said to have done in Mark 10:17-31. The covenant law codes of Exodus-Numbers and the great deuteronomic code are actually strangely absent from the preaching of the prophets (as recounted in the Hebrew Bible).

    Had these codes in fact been given to ancient Israel as the Bible now depicts we might have expected the prophets either to cite them as authorities when demanding reform, or at least refer to them as requirements that have not been fulfilled. This suggests that the codes may have taken shape more as a response to the preaching of the prophets, rather than the prophets having been shaped by the Decalogue.

    The spirit of the decalogue can be discerned in the words of Amos. Had he known the Decalogue, surely he would have quoted it as preachers and prophets have done ever since?

     

    Wisdom of Solomon 7

    In RC communities the following text from the 1C Jewish text, the Wisdom of Solomon, prepares for the Gospel story of the the rich young ruler:

    I prayed, and prudence was given me;
    I pleaded, and the spirit of wisdom came to me.
    I preferred her to scepter and throne,
    and deemed riches nothing in comparison with her,
    nor did I liken any priceless gem to her;
    because all gold, in view of her, is a little sand,
    and before her, silver is to be accounted mire.
    Beyond health and comeliness I loved her,
    and I chose to have her rather than the light,
    because the splendor of her never yields to sleep.
    Yet all good things together came to me in her company,
    and countless riches at her hands.

    Unlike the rich man in Mark’s tale, here we have a wise young ruler who prefers wisdom over wealth. As we have seen in recent weeks, the Jewish wisdom writings often imagined divine Wisdom as a woman who the sage does well to court. This feminine imaging of God may itself be one of the aspects of wisdom that the contemporary church needs to pursue and embrace as we seek to live more deeply into the mystery of the God who is beyond all our creeds and liturgies—even our Scriptures?

    Second Reading: Hebrews

    The RCL and RC cycles draw on Hebrews 4 for the second reading. This short passage has provided several biblical images that have entered deeply into the imagination of the Christian community:

    • the Word of God as sharper than a two-edged sword
    • Jesus was tempted in every way as we are, yet without sin
    • approaching the throne of grace with boldness

    The first is often misunderstood as a description of the Bible, when it is really a description of Jesus as the divine Logos or Word. Much of the contemporary debate over faith and practice seems also to reflect that misunderstanding. The Bible is not the “Word of God” but a sacred text through which we may–by God’s Spirit–encounter the divine Logos, the Living Word. It is Christ that Christians experience as the living and active one who penetrates deeply into our lives and reveals/challenges our hearts’ intentions.

    The second takes us deeply into the Christian devotion to Jesus. He is revered as the eternal Word, yet seen as a truly human one subject to all the temptations that any other human person faces. In traditional Christian devotion we find it hard even to imagine Jesus as ever having sinned. The idea of his personal intrinsic sinless status probably derives from the metaphor of Jesus as the perfect sacrificial offering (the lamb without spot or blemish) rather than from any historical memory of him as “sinless.”

    Still, it is worth reflecting on what such a sinless humanity might look like? Would it mean Jesus never lost his temper? As a child did he always accept his parents instruction? Did he not ever need discipline? Was doubt never a part of his journey to wholeness? Was there a journey to wholeness, or did he escape such incompleteness? If so, how “like us” was he in reality?

    The value of such questions lies not so much in the ways we answer them in relation to Jesus, as in the ways they open up our own concept of what it means to be truly human and entirely authentic in our own living.

    The third of these classic images is the idea that we have access to a source of divine life and grace that enables us for authentic living. The metaphor of the powerful patron to whom the supplicant goes seeking mercy and assistance comes out of the ancient world and may no longer be an appropriate way to imagine God or ourselves. But the reality that we draw on the loving presence of God for the vision and strength to live authentic human lives as disciples of Jesus and children of God can perhaps be expressed in contemporary terms.

     

     

     

    Gospel: A question of wealth

    This week’s Gospel story is commonly known as the “rich young ruler” although none of the Gospel versions of this story (Mark 10:17-22 = Matt 19:16-22 = Luke 18:18-23) present all three characteristics.

    This is a story that is familiar to anyone with a passing knowledge of the Gospel tradition, but for that reason it also repays close attention.

    The story of the man with money (who Matthew describes as a youth and Luke describes as a ruler) is a good text to illustrate the literary processes by which the Gospels were created. It is most unlikely that we have accounts of three different events, in which three different persons approached Jesus for a very similar conversation, and which each Gospel has recorded independently. A close reading of the stories and their literary contexts suggests we are dealing with the same story which Matthew and Luke have borrowed from Mark and developed in slightly different ways.

    If you are using these notes in a small group, it is well worth the trouble to copy the parallel texts and ask people to read closely through the three versions of the story. They should look for those places where the stories converge as well as those points where they diverge. They might then wish to discuss the following questions:

    • What is the significance of these differences?
    • What insights into the formation of the tradition emerge for us from these observations?
    • What are the larger implications for our appreciation of the Gospels from this glimpse into their formation?
    • In what ways are we richer for having all three accounts rather than just a single “life of Jesus”?
    • What does “inspiration” mean for books of this kind when used by people such as us?

    We also need to ask ourselves whether we are able to embrace Jesus’ radical call to let go of wealth so that we can truly be his disciples? Do we walk away “shocked” (Mark), “grieving” (Matthew) and “sad” (Luke) because we have “so many possessions”? Are we unable to let them go even if only to free our hands to receive the gift of life held out to us by the Beloved?

    On the significance of the eye of the needle aphorism, see 199 Kingdom and Riches including the cited parallels from Rabbinic and Islamic texts.

     

     

     

    Jesus Database

     

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

     

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.

  • Pentecost 19B (7 October 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Job 1:1; 2:1-10 and Psalm 26 (or Genesis 2:18-24 & Psalm 8)
    • Hebrews 1:1-4; 2:5-12
    • Mark 10:2-16

    First Reading: Job

    This week the RCL begins a series of readings from the Book of Job as part of the extended exploration of ancient Israel’s wisdom tradition in these final months of Year B.

    Job has had a profound impact on Western culture as a classic of the human quest for meaning in a world marked by suffering. It is rightly seen as an example of wisdom literature and yet it also offers a critique of traditional wisdom, as Jay Williams observes:

    … though Job begins with the thought-forms and the questions of the wiseman, the book must be said to stand ‘at the edge of wisdom.’ It is, in fact, an impassioned assertion of the awareness that the simple moralism of most wise men is hardly enough. Proverbs is full of the kind of ‘practical’ advice which a father might offer to his son who is starting out to seek his fortune in the big wide world. Work hard, act and speak honestly, beware evil women and you will succeed. Job avoids all such cliches. In fact, the more one reads the book the more difficult it becomes to know just what answer is being given. Only the most superficial reader will put down the book fully convinced that he has understood it. Like Plato, who also wrote in dialogue form and who often ended his dialogues inconclusively, the authors of Job involve the reader in an intense debate which ends, not with a final Q.E.D., but with a new set of questions. If there is truth to be found in the book, therefore, it is born in the midst of struggle. Perhaps the truth is the struggle itself. [Jay G. Williams, Understanding the Old Testament, 267-268]

    The ambiguity and ambivalence of Job is one of its most attractive features for many modern (and postmodern) readers. Here is a biblical text that celebrates the lack of a compelling answer, and instead calls us to faithfulness that sees beyond suffering to a meaning beyond human comprehension.

    The literary origins of this text are unclear:

    It is even more difficult to say when the book was written. Ezekiel referred to Job as an important person alongside Noah and Daniel (Ezek. 14:14-20). Moreover, tradition put him in the patriarchal period and made the book one of the oldest in the Bible. Modern scholars are skeptical of such claims to antiquity, but proposed dates range from the tenth to the third century B.C. The book itself is completely silent about its time, with no allusions to historical events or topical subjects … Job 3:4 is a parodistic allusion to Gen. 1:3, a creation account usually dated after the Exile in the sixth century B.C. Such evidence suggests but does not prove that Job was composed and completed after the Babylonian exile. [Edwin M. Good, Harper Bible Commentary, 370]

    This week we begin with the classic opening scene in which God and Satan are engaged in a wager over the strength of Job’s love for God. For many people this will raise questions about the Satan figure as an embodiment of evil, but that is really an aside in the reading of Job. Here, Satan is effectively the Director of Public Prosecutions in the divine court; one of the “sons of God” with a specific portfolio, rather than a rival to the Almighty.

    The following advice from Edwin Good’s introduction to Job in the Harper Bible Commentary appears under the heading, “On Reading Job”

    It was suggested that Job be approached as fiction. That means to think of Job, the friends, and the deity as characters in the story. Like characters in any story, they may be presented with mixed motives and attitudes, with both knowledge and ignorance. Readers may find it hard to think of God as a character in a story, but the thought may allow perception of the unexpected in the divine speeches. Some interpreters have proposed that the deity comes across as a blustery windbag! That thought is worth considering as at least a possibility–it doesn’t have to be adopted if it doesn’t fit.
    The Book is carried by the speeches, so attention must be paid to the words themselves. Reading aloud may help the hearing of tones of voice, inflections, anger, sarcasm, irony, humor, despair, or many other ways of talking. Job is complex. Consideration must be given to the ways people reply–or fail to reply–to what others have said, and how any speech carries on the debate or stalls it. Do Job and friends talk past each other, as some have proposed? Is it a mixture of conversation and scoring debating points? Perhaps the crucial part for reading is chaps. 38-42. What is Yahweh’s tone of voice? What is Job’s? Is Job responsive to Yahweh’s words? Does Yahweh respond to what went on in the rest of the book? Does he suggest a solution to the problem of Job’s suffering?
    The fact that firm conclusions cannot be reached about many of these things is not a cause for concern. It only means the book needs to be read again and again, and minds challenged about it again and again. [Harper Bible Commentary, 371]

    Bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh …

    The ancient creation story in Gen 2-3 tells the tale of paradise lost. From idyllic beginnings in the garden the “earth creature” (as Phyllis Tribble suggests we translate “adam” with its intentional echo of “earth, adamah“) becomes a being who lives in relationship with another and yet loses the original blessing of paradise.

    In RC and ECUSA communities, the first reading this week takes up the creation of sexual difference within the human person, and the origins of marriage.

    It is timely that the Guardian newspaper this week (30 September 2012) has a story about the end of the church’s wars over sexuality. That story notes the growing acceptance of gay and lesbian sexual orientation even among Evangelical leaders, and concludes that the “war” over sexuality is almost over; and that the liberals have won.

    The ancient Jewish legend imagines the original human person as an asexual being, but the divine purposes only come to completeness with the appearance of two sexually differentiated individuals. The creation poem in Gen 1 speaks of a single humanity created in both male and female forms:

    So God created humankind in his image,
    in the image of God he created them;
    male and female he created them. (1:27)

    The relational dimensions of authentic humanity are also expressed in this ancient story of the solitary earthling becoming two persons of the same substance.

    Some biblical interpreters have chosen to stress the chronological priority of “the man” over “the woman.” However, this seems a culturally-determined (and, for males, a quite self-serving) interpretation. There may be a deeper truth in the story’s assertion that women and men are all constituted of exactly the same material. We share a common humanity and exist only in relationship to one another.

    Second Reading: The Letter to the Hebrews

    Through the remainder of the liturgical year, the three major lectionaries will all select the second reading from the Letter to the Hebrews.

    The following comments are based on the commentary by Harold W. Attridge in the HarperCollins Bible Commentary (pp. 1149-61):

    The work known as the Letter to the Hebrews was not originally a letter; nor were its addressees likely to have been “Hebrews.” Though often though to be Paul, the author is unknown. …

    The general range within which Hebrews was written runs from ca. A.D. 60 to ca. 95. The earlier date is suggested by the author’s reference to himself and his community as second generation Christians (2:3-4). The advanced state of the traditions used in the text, especially its Christology (the way it identifies Jesus), also presupposes some time for development. …

    Many critics argue that Hebrews was written prior to A.D. 70 because it refers to the Jewish Temple worship as a present reality and does not mention the destruction of the Temple, but neither argument is probative. Both Jewish and Christian authors writing after 70 refer to the Temple in present terms. More important, Hebrews is not interested in the actual cult of the Herodian Temple, but in the depiction of the cult of the desert tabernacle. …

    The genre of the work is problematic because it ends with standard epistolary formulas, but lacks an initial address and greetings. … The document as a whole is as much a scripturally based homily as are its component parts, and its self-description as a “word of encouragement” (13:22) is apt. The conclusion suggests that the exhortation was sent to a congregation at some distance from its author. …

    The designation of the addressees as “Hebrews” seems to be a later scribal inference based on the contents of the text …

    Although the ethnic origin of the intended readers is unclear, Hebrews does give some data about them. They had been Christians for some time (5:12) and, because of that commitment, had experienced persecution (10:32-34), which is expected to continue (12:3-13; 13:3). Part of Hebrews’ function is to inspire the faithful endurance necessary to meet such threats. Of equal importance, the community seems to be undergoing a crisis of confidence. Some have been neglecting the community assembly (10:25). Such behavior may be a reaction to outside threats or even to the attractions of traditional Judaism, but it could equally well derive from a waning enthusiasm with complex causes. It is also not clear how well informed the author was about these causes. He senses, however, the possibility of apostasy and wants to prevent it by rekindling faith.

    In this week’s passage we see the author drawing on OT texts to interpret Jesus as the divine Son through whom God has revealed himself “in these last days.” Various citations from the Psalms are understood as either descriptions of Jesus or as statements by Jesus.

    At the same time, the author seems unaware that these are Bible citations. We do not find the familiar claim that Jesus “fulfilled the Scriptures” or that his life was lived “according to the Scriptures.” Rather, we have the vague, “someone has testified somewhere …” (Heb 2:6). The author seems to be working with a convenient collection of “testimonia” texts, rather than directly from the Bible.

    Gospel: Jesus and divorce

    The forms of the sayings that we have in the Synoptic tradition have clearly been worked over by Mark, Matthew and Luke. In the case of 1 Corinthians 7, it is not even clear that Paul is citing a historical tradition associated with Jesus rather than an equally authoritative tradition derived from the risen Lord speaking through a prophet in the early Christian communities. The Shepherd of Hermes provides an insight into the sexual politics of the Christian communities in late 1C period.

    At the same time, I do think that there was most likely a saying from Jesus, probably couched in direct and uncompromising terms, that rejected the practice of a husband discarding his wide in order to marry someone else. My suggestion is that such a statement would fit well into the historical situation of Jesus around the time of Herod’s arrest/murder of John the Baptist. Just as JBap attacked Herod’s action in divorcing his Nabatean wife to marry Herodias, it seems highly likely that Jesus would have opposed such shabby treatment of Herod’s wife.

    I suggest that Luke 16:18a may be very close to the original saying of Jesus:

    Anyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery.

    For these reasons, had I been attending the Jesus Seminar session that voted on this cluster, I suspect that I would have voted as follows:

    • 1 Cor 7: Black (Paul is citing the risen Lord not the HJ)
    • Luke 16:18: Pink
    • Matt 5:31-32: Black (scribal interests dominating this version)
    • Mark 10:11: Pink
    • Mark 10:1-9,12 // Matt 19:3-12: Black (again, scribal interests)
    • HermMan: Black (reflects sexual ethic of later community)

    Crossan [Historical Jesus, 301f] considers this complex as part of his discussion of Jesus against the patriarchal family. He notes the androcentric tradition of Jewish divorce laws at the time meant that the core issue was the defence of the man’s honor. Drawing on the work of John Kloppenborg (“Alms, Debt and Divorce: Jesus’ Ethics in Their Mediterranean Context” Toronto Journal of Theology 6: 1990, 182-200) Crossan highlights the significance of Jesus’ teaching against divorce. In Jesus’ novel ethic, the male who expels his wife and marries someone else has committed adultery against the rejected spouse; bringing shame on himself. Crossan concludes:

    The opposition here is not just to divorce. To forbid divorce one has only to say that divorce is never legal. That is exactly what happens in the much less radical 252 Moses and Divorce [2/1]. The attack is actually against ‘androcentric honour whose debilitating effects went far beyond the situation of divorce. It was also the basis for the dehumanisation of women, children, and non-dominant males’ (Kloppenborg, 1990:196).

    I find this interpretation of the ideological basis of Jesus’ condemnation of wife-dumping in 1C Palestine to be evocative.

    Even if we think Jesus adopted a strong view against divorce, that does not translate into a simple view of how we handle the issue in our kind of society. For instance, should the principle of “the sabbath was made for Adam and Eve, not Adam and Eve for the sabbath” also be applied to Jesus’ strictures on divorce? Can we affirm an underlying value while also acknowledging that the needs of people always come before the impartial imposition of an abstract rule?

    As always in any discussion of this particular cluster, I declare my personal interest as a divorced and re-married white male.

    Jesus Database

    Liturgies and Prayers

    For liturgies and sermons each week, shaped by a progressive theology, check Rex Hunt’s web site

    Other recommended sites include:

    Music Suggestions

    See David MacGregor’s Together to Celebrate site for recommendations from a variety of contemporary genre.