gregoryjenks

Author: Gregory C. Jenks

  • Pentecost 15B (9 September 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23 & Psalm 125
    • James 2:1-10, (11-13), 14-17
    • Mark 7:24-37

     

    Introduction

    This week’s readings continue the exploration of biblical Wisdom writings and invite us to move beyond our comfort zones to the surprising places where true insight is to be found (and practised).

     

    First Reading: Rich and poor have this in common

    The passage from Proverbs presents us with some of ancient Israel’s collective wisdom on the relations between the rich and poor. The ultimate dignity of both derives from their common status as creatures: “the LORD is the maker of them all.” Generosity is a virtue, but the poor have a right not to be exploited. Ultimately, God was understood to have a particular interest in the poor.

     

    Second Reading: A bias to the poor

    There is a provocative convergence between the Jesus who encounters a pagan woman or uses saliva to heal a deaf-mute, and the text of James that challenges our comfort zones among people of similar social status to ourselves. James comes from a Christian experience that is more familiar with poverty and less accustomed to power.

    Most of us are properly described as “a person with gold rings and in fine clothes.”

    Would we choose to be disciples of the Jewish magician with muddy fingers if it also cost us our lifestyle? Are we genuinely able to make welcome someone whose poverty incarnates our own fears of what we might become?

    Are we able to voice the beatitude of Jesus: Blessed are the poor?

     

    Gospel: Jesus and the Lebanese woman

    Like the modern lectionaries, not all ancient Gospel writers chose to use this story. Luke omits the story (along with several other stories found in Mark/Matthew) as part of his major deviation from the dominant Synoptic order. This so-called “Great Omission” by Luke excluded the following material from his account of Jesus:

    • Mark 6:45-46 = Matt 14:22-23 Departures after 5,000 fed
    • Mark 6:47-52 = Matt 14:24-33 Walking on the Sea
    • Mark 6:53-56 = Matt 14:34-36 Many sick cured
    • Mark 7:1-13 = Matt 15:1-9 Eating with defiled hands
    • Mark 7:14-23 = Matt 15:10-20 Explanations in private
    • Mark 7:24-30 = Matt 15:21-28 Greek woman’s daughter
    • Mark 7:31-37 = ?Matt 15:29-31 Deaf-mute healed
    • Mark 8:1-10 = Matt 15:32-39 Bread and fish for 4,000
    • Mark 8:11-13 = Matt 16:1-4 Demand for a sign
    • Mark 8:14-21 = Matt 16:5-12 Bread and leaven
    • Mark 8:22-26 Blind man healed

     

    It is not clear what Luke’s reason for omitting this week’s story may have been.

    • Was he offended by the picture of a xenophobic Jesus needing a master class in Kingdom values from a pagan woman?
    • Was it simply part of a section of Mark that Luke chose to delete in order to create his own “orderly account” arranged around different themes?

    The story itself puzzles the modern reader, and may have also challenged the ancient Gospel writers. Luke omits it, while Matthew adapts the story in some significant ways. (For details see the horizontal line synopsis in the Jesus Database site.)

    The general effect of Matthew’s changes is to improve the story so that Jesus is treated with more respect. The woman (now described as a Canaanite) uses proper Jewish categories (Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David). It is the disciples who seek to drive her away. Jesus acknowledges her great faith (unlike the disciples with their little faith, eg Matt 14:31; 16:8; 17:20) and the healing of the daughter is instantaneous.

    Note how the story is set in southern Lebanon – the territory of Tyre, south of the Litani River. Jesus has left Galilee and travelled to the coastal city of Tyre for some respite from the pressures of his ministry. He finds – or knows of – a “safe house” where he can escape the glare of publicity. But word gets out and a local woman with a desperately ill daughter seeks his assistance.

    The core of the story concerns an encounter with a pagan woman whose needs challenge his own assumptions about the extent of God’s love and his own obligations to people beyond his own community. While it dealt with an issue of great concern to the emerging Christian community after Jesus’ death, it portrays Jesus as someone needing to expand the boundaries of his own spiritual imagination. Even Jesus, it seems, had something to learn by welcoming and listening to the Gentiles. As such it seems unlikely to have been created by the early Christian story tellers. Like the brute fact that Jesus had begun as a disciple of John the Baptist, here was a story that either had to be suppressed (Luke? John?) or embraced.

    • This story offers us an opportunity to expand our spiritual imaginations as well?
    • How do we cope with a Jesus who is a life-long learner (to use modern educational jargon), rather than someone with all the answers in advance of the test?
    • Who are the “strangers” that challenge our convenient assumptions about the limits to our compassion? Is there anyone who can be imagined as beyond the scope of God’s justice?

     

    Jesus heals a deaf man with a speech impediment

    This week’s lectionary also uses the story of Jesus healing a deaf man with a speech impediment. This is a story found only in Mark, although Matthew may have created a summary passage (Matt 15:29-31) partly on the basis of Mark’s story.

    John P. Meier comments on this unusual healing story:

    … there are indications that we are dealing here not with pure creation by Mark but with some tradition Mark has inherited. An initial signal is the significant number of words in the seven verses of this miracle story that never occur anywhere else in Mark’s Gospel. Then there are the unusual, even bizarre, elements in the narrative that make it stand out from the ordinary pattern of miracle stories in the Gospels in general and in Mark in particular. Specifically, the healing of the deaf-mute, perhaps even more than the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida, is replete with ritual or symbolic actions of Jesus that could be interpreted as magic. This may explain why this story and the healing at Bethsaida are the only two Marcan miracles that are omitted by both Matthew and Luke.
    Jesus’ ritual-like gestures include (1) putting his fingers into the man’s ears (symbolic of opening them so that the man can hear), (2) placing his own saliva on the man’s tongue (symbolic of loosing the “bond” of the tongue so that the man can speak, (3) looking up to heaven (probably some gesture of prayer), (4) sighing or groaning deeply (estenaxen, seen by some as expressing the inner “arousal” of the charismatic’s miracle-working powers), and (5) the command “be opened” (given by Mark both in the Aramaic ephphatha and in Greek translation. [Marginal Jew II,711-14]

    Jesus as charismatic healer and exorcist is not a familiar image to many Western Christians, although such an image would find a welcome in the life of a Pentecostal mission church and maybe in an African Anglican congregation.

    The Jesus celebrated in this strange little story was perhaps too much into “magic” for Matthew and Luke. The charge that Jesus was a sorcerer and a magician was something they felt a need to guard against, writing some time later than Mark.

    John Dominic Crossan has an interesting discussion of magic as “religious banditry” in his Historical Jesus, ch13. He writes at one point:

    … magic is to religion as banditry is to politics. As banditry challenges the legitimacy of political power, so magic challenges that of spiritual power. Magic and religion can be mutually distinguished, in the ancient world or in the modern one, by political and prescriptive definitions but not by substantive, descriptive, or neutral descriptions. Religion is official and approved magic; magic is unofficial and unapproved religion. The question is not whether magicians are for or against official religion. Their very existence, totally apart from such intentions, is a challenge to its validity and exclusivity. [p. 305]

    Warming to his theme, Crossan continues:

    Because of magic’s position as subversive, unofficial, unapproved, and often lower-class religion, I have deliberately used the word magic rather than some euphemism in the preceding and present parts of this book. Elijah and Elisha, Honi and Hanina, were magicians, and so was Jesus of Nazareth. It is endlessly fascinating to watch Christian theologians describe Jesus as miracle worker rather than magician and then attempt to define the substantive difference between those two.

    Both this story and the earlier episode with the Lebanese woman present us with unfamiliar sketches of Jesus. This is not the Lord of eternity, the one who knows what is in the human heart, and who calmly commits his mother into the care of another man before his own death confident of exaltation back to heaven. Instead, we catch a glimpse of a strange and somewhat frightening Galilean holy man. Is this the human face of God for us? Do we prefer a face that is more like our own? A figure less likely to stand out from the crowd on the sidewalk?

    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.

  • Why historical Jesus research matters

    An extract from an essay I have just completed for a forthcoming collection edited my colleague, J. Harold Ellens:

    I am seriously interested in what Jesus may have done about certain issues we face as humans. I doubt that we can answer such a question with precision and certainty. But I am convinced that applying our best efforts to such a project is one way to grasp that deep wisdom needed if we are to shape lives that are ‘holy’ and ‘true.’ This is not because we shall discover exactly what Jesus might have thought or done about some issue. Rather, it is because—in the process of reflecting deeply on the problem—we may just discover what we need to do about that issue. And that, I suspect, is what Jesus wants most of all—not imitation, but a sustained effort to practice the kind of faith he seems to have found, and to live with the kind of wisdom that he seems to have embodied, and in the end to die with the kind of integrity that he seems to have demonstrated.

    The full essay will appear as:

    “Imagine this: Jesus and the kingdom of God.” in Winning Revolutions: The Psychology of Successful Revolts for Freedom, Fairness, and Rights. Ed. J. Harold Ellens. 3 Vols. Westport, CT: Praeger, 2012.

    I wonder why other people pursue the quest for the historical Jesus?

  • Pentecost 14B (02 September 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • Song of Solomon 2:8-13 and Psalm 45:1-2, 6-9
    • James 1:17-27
    • Mark 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23

     

    Introduction

    In some ways, this week represents a transition in the Sunday lections:

    • We begin a series from the ancient Jewish Wisdom writings
    • We begin a series from James, a classic Christian “wisdom” text
    • We return to Mark, the default Gospel for Year B

     

    First Reading: Song of Solomon

    After a lengthy series in the prophetic historical narratives of Samuel and Kings (material known as the “Former Prophets” in the Hebrew Bible), the RCL now begins a series of weeks during which the OT reading is drawn from the wisdom literature of ancient Israel:

    • SongSol 2:8-13
    • Prov 22:1-2,8-9,22-23
    • WisSol 7:26-8:1 (or, Prov 1:20-33)
    • Prov 31:10-31
    • Esther 7:1-6,9-10; 9:20-22
    • Job 1:1; 2:1-10
    • Job 23:1-9,16-17
    • Job 38:1-7,(34-41)
    • Job 42:1-6,10-17
    • Ruth 1:1-18
    • Ruth 3:1-5; 4:13-17
    • 1 Samuel 1:4-20

    While Esther, Ruth and the story of Hannah (1Sam 1) are not strictly “wisdom texts,” they do portray women as significant characters and active agents of God’s Wisdom.
    The Song of Solomon is one of several wisdom texts attributed to Solomon by later authors.

    Within the Hebrew Bible:

    • Proverbs
    • Ecclesiastes, or Qoheleth
    • Song of Solomon, or Song of Songs, or Canticles

    In the Greek Bible (LXX):

    • Wisdom of Solomon

    Among the Old Testament Apocrypha & Pseudepigrapha:

    • Odes of Solomon
    • Psalms of Solomon

    The Song of Solomon is a joyful affirmation of sexual love, and its inclusion in the canon has proved something of an embarrassment to pious readers. As it fails to mention God even once, its place in the canon was challenged in ancient times. Traditional Jewish and Christian exegesis has understood this erotic poem as an allegory of the divine love for Israel or the Church, but more recently commentators have accepted the plain sense of the text.

    Michael V. Fox [HarperCollins Bible Commentary] observes:

    The present commentary reads the Song of Songs as a secular poem about unmarried, human lovers. Such a song would originally have been sung for entertainment (a use that Rabbi Akiva mentions, and deplores, in the second century A.D.). Only in the course of long use was it reinterpreted as a religious document and included in the biblical canon. The Song of Songs is a celebration of private human experience. It treasures adolescent love and does not seek to infuse a “greater” meaning into this joyous experience. It does not even use the opportunity to extol, or appeal for, the blessings of procreation, family, and prosperity. Love is its own justification. [p. 472]

    The excerpt chosen for use this week centers around a night time visit to the woman by her lover. Here, as in other parts of the Song, the lovers are assumed to be equal partners in the relationship:

    The couple’s relationship is strikingly egalitarian, as if bracketed out for the moment from the assumptions of a patriarchal society. Though social constraints restrict the girl more than the boy, within the one-to-one relationship their possession is mutual (2:16), their desires indistinguishable, and their description of each other of much the same sort. This is an idealization of love, but not one devoid of roots in private experience. [Fox, 472f]

    Those patriarchal assumptions are paraded in the designated psalm portion. Psalm 45 is most likely a royal wedding song, and it celebrates without any sense of shame the militarism, corruption and exploitation that was endemic in such societies. The following verses are excised from the text read in services, but they reveal the dominant social values of the biblical world:

    Gird your sword on your thigh, O mighty one, in your glory and majesty.
    In your majesty ride on victoriously for the cause of truth and to defend the right;
    let your right hand teach you dread deeds.
    Your arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; the peoples fall under you.
    Hear, O daughter, consider and incline your ear; forget your people and your father’s house,
    and the king will desire your beauty. Since he is your lord, bow to him;
    the people of Tyre will seek your favor with gifts, the richest of the people45:13 with all kinds of wealth.
    The princess is decked in her chamber with gold-woven robes;
    in many-colored robes she is led to the king; behind her the virgins, her companions, follow.
    With joy and gladness they are led along as they enter the palace of the king.

    Torah as Identity and Mission

    The passage from Deuteronomy 4, listed as an alternative in the RCL this week, comes from another of the major deuteronomistic speeches mentioned last week in connection with Joshua 24.

    In this case, we have an appeal for Torah observance placed on the lips of Moses.

    The faith that is expressed in this literary fiction is one centered around Torah. In this 7C BCE document we can see the emerging self-identity of “Israel” (in fact, more properly “Judah” centered on Jerusalem) as a moral community rather than simply a political entity. At least that is the case being argued by the prophetic reformers whose agenda was being advanced by the production of the Deuteronomic History running from Deuteronomy through Joshua, Judges, 1&2 Samuel and 1&2 Kings.

    Here are religious leaders with a vision for a society that builds a reputation for wisdom and discernment, rather than military prowess or mercantile success. Their community identity and also their collective mission derived from this sense of faithfulness to the divine Torah.

    In the designated psalm portion (Ps 15), we catch a glimpse of another expression of Torah observance.

    Jacob Neusner cites a much later example of Judaism’s ongoing reflection on the meaning of Torah:

    Six hundred and thirteen commandments were given to Moses, three hundred and sixty-five negative ones, corresponding to the days of the solar year, and two hundred forty-eight positive commandments, corresponding to the parts of man’s body…

    David came and reduced them to eleven: A Psalm of David [Psalm 15] Lord, who shall sojourn in thy tabernacle, and who shall dwell in thy holy mountain? (i) He who walks uprightly and (ii) works righteousness and (iii) speaks truth in his heart and (iv) has no slander on his tongue and (v) does no evil to his fellow and (vi) does not take up a reproach against his neighbour, (vii) in whose eyes a vile person is despised but (viii) honors those who fear the Lord. (ix) He swears to his own hurt and changes not. (x) He does not lend on interest. (xi) He does not take a bribe against the innocent, …

    Isaiah came and reduced them to six [Isaiah 33:25–26]: (i) He who walks righteously and (ii) speaks uprightly, (iii) he who despises the gain of oppressions, (iv) shakes his hand from holding bribes, (v) stops his ear from hearing of blood (vi) and shuts his eyes from looking on evil, he shall dwell on high.

    Micah came and reduced them to three [Micah 6:8]: It has been told you, man, what is good and what the Lord demands from you, (i) only to do justly, and (ii) to love mercy, and (iii) to walk humbly before God …

    Isaiah came again and reduced them to two [Isaiah 56:1]: Thus says the Lord, (i) keep justice and (ii) do righteousness.

    Amos came and reduced them to a single one, as it is said, For thus says the Lord to the house of Israel, Seek Me and live.

    Habakkuk further came and based them on one, as it is said [Habakkuk 2:4], But the righteous shall live by his faith.

    — Talmud, b. Makkot, 24(a) [cited in Jacob Neusner, The Way of Torah, 22]

     

    Second Reading: Christian wisdom

    The letter of James is a distinctive voice from the first generation of Christianity. It claims to have been written by the brother of Jesus. At the very least, James represents a way of being Christian that is less driven by the emerging christologies of the Cross (as in Paul) or Divine Wisdom (John). Here is a 1C Christian community that understands its link to Jesus as being through the family of Jesus and which preserves a particularly practical expression of faith in which right action takes precedence over correct doctrine.

    Luke T. Johnson, author of a recent commentary on James (Anchor Bible, Volume 37a. 1995), characterizes the book as follows:

    The teaching of James is general rather than particular, traditional rather than novel, moral rather than theological. The goal of the writing is not so much right thinking as right acting. The fundamental contrast is between verbal profession and action; when James contrasts “faith” and “works” (2:14), he sets empty belief in opposition to lived practice. [HarperCollins Commentary, 1162]

    Given the current RCL focus on texts from ancient Israel’s wisdom tradition, James’ affinities with the tradition are also noteworthy:

    James is remarkable for its positive appropriation of Torah, whose separate aspects it mediates to the messianic community. The short exhortations concerned with practical behavior resemble and incorporate elements of the wisdom tradition, reaching from Hellenistic moral philosophy to the biblical books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. … James also affirms the law, calling it the “law of liberty” (2:12), which is summarized by the Decalogue and the “law of love” (Lev 19:18. cf. 2:8-11). James elaborates this commandment in the light of Lev. 19:11-19 and Jesus’ words. [Johnson, ibid]

    James might be expected to serve as a window into the earliest Jesus traditions, even if it is not actually the work of Jesus’ own brother. There do seem to be a number of ways in which this work reflects some knowledge of the sayings and practices of Jesus.

    • Ask for what is needed, since God is generous and ungrudging. (Matt 7:7-11) [Jas 1:5-6]
    • The lowly raised up, and the rich brought low (Matt 20:16) [Jas 1:9-10]
    • Criticism of the rich [Jas 1:10-11; 5:1-6]
    • Use of Beatitudes [Jas 1:12]
    • Deliverance from temptation (Matt 6:13a) [Jas 1:12-16]
    • Use of Parables [Jas 1:22-26; 3:2-6]
    • Blessed for Doing (John 13:17) [Jas 1:25]
    • Blessed are the poor (Matt 5:3) [Jas 2:2-7]
    • Keeping the commandments (Mark 12:28-34) [Jas 2:8-12]
    • Unforgiving servant (Matt 18:23-35) [Jas 2:13]
    • Practical charity (Matt 25:31-46) [Jas 2:14-17]
    • By their fruit (Matt 7:16-20) [Jas 3:11-12]
    • On Judging (Matt 7:1-2a) [Jas 4:11-12]
    • On Anxieties (Matt 6:25-34) [Jas 4:13-15]
    • On Oaths (Matt 5:33-370 [Jas 5:12]
    • Healing and Forgiveness (Matt 10:1,7-8) [Jas 5:13-18]
    • Scold and Forgive (Matt 18:15) [Jas 5:19-20]

    Even if some of these items derive from the post-Easter community, this list indicates a significant focus on traditions associated with Jesus.

    Gospel: Jesus and the purity codes

    The Gospel for all three major lectionaries deals with excerpts from Mark 7:1-23, a complex tradition that preserves a memory of Jesus as someone who intentionally contravened the purity requirements of his own society and advocated a radical reinterpretation of purity to apply to internal dispositions rather than external observance.

    The following comments come from Marcus Borg, Conflict, Holiness and Politics in the Teachings of Jesus. (Trinity Press International, 1998):

    … one of the consequences of the Pharisaic extension of priestly regulations to nonpriests was the insistence that hands be washed before even ordinary meals. At issue here, of course, was not hygiene but holiness. According to both Mark and Q (or Luke), Jesus and his disciples were charged with eating with unwashed hands. Both sources indicate deliberate nonobservance and give no reason to suggest that the behavior was necessitated by special circumstances.

    To determine the response of Jesus to this accusation, the complexities of Mark 7:1-23 must serve as a point of departure. As it stands in Mark, it begins with the accusation regarding washing of hands and climaxes with v. 15:

    There is nothing outside of a person which by going into that person can defile;
    but the things which come out of a person are what defile.

    There is virtual unanimity among all schools of criticism that this saying is authentic. The major issue is the meaning of the saying. To what did it refer when Jesus spoke it? Since it was spoken to some concrete situation involving controversy with opponents, its primary thrust is to be determined by that controversy rather than in isolation.

    In Mark, it has two different thrusts to two different audiences. in public (v. 14), it answered the Pharisaic charge that Jesus’ disciples ate with unwashed hands. In private (vv. 17-23), to the disciples, it nullified the Mosaic laws on clean and unclean foods (Deut. 14:3-20; Lev. 11), most explicitly in v. 19b: “Thus he declared all foods clean.”

    That the second thrust is authentic is unlikely for several reasons. First, there is no indication elsewhere that this was an issue during the ministry. Indeed, had Jesus rejected the food laws of the Pentateuch, most likely an accusation to that effect would have been made and preserved, but no such accusation is reported. Though this is an argument from silence, it has some force since accusations about sabbath observance, washing of hands, eating with tax collectors and sinners, etc., do appear. Of greater weight is a second reason: the indecision of the early Jesus movement after Jesus’ death over the continued validity of the Mosaic laws on forbidden foods is virtually inexplicable if Jesus had unambiguously rejected the distinction between clean and unclean foods. Moreover, v. 19b, which is responsible for directing the saying to the question of forbidden foods is in a section (vv. 17-23) commonly viewed as secondary …

    Two possibilities remain: it was addressed to a conflict which can no longer with certainty be identified, or it was directed to the issue of ritual purity of hands at meals. The first is certainly possible, though the second is more probable for two reasons. Concern about ritual purity of hands is a known controversy; and Luke independently of Mark reports a Q saying with similar content as a reply to the same accusation:

    Luke 11:38-41: The Pharisee noticed with surprise that Jesus had not begun by washing before the meal. But the Lord said to him, “You Pharisees! You clean the outside of the cup and plate; but inside you there is nothing but greed and wickedness. You fools! Did not he who made the outside make the inside too? But cleanse those things which are within; and behold, everything is clean for you.”

    … Taken together, the accusations and replies reported by Mark and Luke lead to very important conclusions. First, the behavior against which the accusations were directed contravened an important aspect of the extension of priestly regulations to daily life: it denied the validity of one of the main requirements for membership in a Pharisaic havurah. Second, the warrant given for the contravention called into question and indeed negated the whole notion of how holiness was to be achieved. The equation between holiness and separation, qadosh and parush, was denied, for holiness had nothing to do with separation from the external sources of defilement … Denying the equation of qadosh and parush constituted an eminently clear opposition to the main thrust of Pharisaic polity and indeed to much of the postexilic development of Judaism.

    The historic meaning of the challenge can be refined by comparing it to two modern ways of stating the significance of Mark 7:15, both of which blunt the cultural and political edge of the controversy. Perrin and Kasemann, both of whom appreciate the radical nature of the saying, argue that here Jesus established the distinction between the sacred and the secular. Though this may finally be quite similar to what is argued above, putting the issue in the form, “Jesus denied the equation of holiness and separation,” has the advantage of being cast in the form of a cultural question of the day. Its historical bite as a challenge to the Pharisaic program for Israel can be better appreciated. Its controversial setting is more seriously obscured by a second modern way of stating the point: Jesus replaces the concern about external rectitude with a concern about the inner spiritual health of the individual. Though this is a valid insight, it both generalizes and individualizes what was originally a specific challenge to a collective model of behavior for a society.

    Here, then, in the behavior of Jesus and his disciples, we have a specific contravention of a necessary prerequisite for table fellowship as understood by the Pharisees, and of a major element in the program to make Israel a kingdom of priests. Moreover, the warrant which Jesus articulated for such nonobservance denied not only the necessity of ritual washing of hands, but also undercut the understanding of holiness as a separation upon which hinged Israel’s course in the present and anticipation of the future. [pp. 111-13]

     

    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.

  • Taking the Bible seriously, but not literally

    [A sermon preached at St John’s Anglican Cathedral, Brisbane at Evensong, on Sunday, 26 August 2012.]

    Anglicans have a long history of taking the Bible very seriously while avoiding the folly of taking it literally.

    In the Articles of Religion, commonly known as the Thirty-Nine Articles, we find the Church of England carefully setting down some important principles about the place of Scripture in the life of the church, the obligations—both moral and theological—flowing from Scripture, and some significant limitations on the capacity of the church to use the Bible.

    As we have slowly and reluctantly come to terms with the European cultural revolution known as the ‘Enlightenment,’ we have found—not surprisingly—that even these carefully-crafted articles seem rather out of date, if not irrelevant. It is not so much that they are wrong. It is more that they are addressing questions that no one really cares about any longer, and doing so in ways we find less than compelling. They are top-down theological statements, and we just don’t buy that way of determining truth any more.

    The Articles of Religion capture the mind of the church up to the time they were written. They reflect the best of faithful scholarship prior to 1562. Naturally, they do not engage with or reflect the changes that have happened in the 450 years since then.

    In the spirit of the Articles of Religion, how might a faithful and informed Anglican from the twenty-first century take the Bible seriously, while avoiding the error of taking the Bible literally?

    BIBLE360

    Over the past few months I have been privileged to work on the development of the BIBLE360 program. This program was commissioned by the Archbishop and then announced at Synod in June, as part of his call for members of this Diocese to engage more directly with Scripture. Since returning from Israel last month I have begun to present these seminars in parishes and deaneries around the Diocese; 3 so far, and 12 to go before Christmas!

    As you may know, the Archbishop has challenged all members of our church to do three things in the twelve months between Synod this year and Synod next year:

    1. Participate in a BIBLE360 seminar;
    2. Engage in daily Bible reading;
    3. Join a small group with a focus on the study of the Bible and its application to life.

    We estimate that at least 800 people will have attended a BIBLE360 seminar before the end of this year, and we are planning for several thousand to have done so by June next year.

    As was clear from the Archbishop’s charge to Synod, central to this whole program is the belief that we need to take the Bible seriously, but should not make the mistake of taking it literally.

    In the next few minutes I hope to give you a sense of what we do at a BIBLE360 seminar, and why it matters for the long term health of the church as well as the wider community.

    The plastic Bible

    Taking the Bible seriously involves developing a realistic—“eyes-wide-open”—sense of what the Bible is really like. At times I discern a romantic and mistaken sense of what kind of text we actually have, and what we might realistically expect the Bible to do for us in the life of the church.

    Some of these issues are addressed in more detail in a new book, The Once and Future Scriptures, that will be published later this year, with essays by several senior priests from our diocese. More about those issues at the book launch soon!

    Last year we celebrated the 400th anniversary of the King James Bible. It was an important anniversary and provided an opportunity to reflect on a book that really changed—and in many ways, shaped—the world as we know it.

    During the 400 years that have passed since the KJV was published we have gained access to a treasure trove of ancient biblical manuscripts. We now have a vast set of information simply not available to the faithful scholars who laboured to create the KJV.

    For the record, we have around 5,500 Greek MSS for the NT and a further 5,000 or so in other ancient languages: Latin, Syriac, etc.

    Among these 10,000 or so MSS are the great fourth-century and fifth-century Bibles, which are our oldest substantial copies of the Bible.

    Of these, the most significant is the Codex Sinaiticus from St Catherine’s Monastery at Mt Sinai. This is the oldest Bible anywhere in the world. It dates from some time in the fourth century. In other words, there is a gap of around 300 years between the time of Jesus and the oldest surviving copy of a substantial portion of the Bible; and even this marvelous MS is missing about half of the Old Testament (Genesis to 1 Chronicles).

    Sinaiticus includes the Old Testament, the Apocrypha, the New Testament, and two other early Christian documents not found in our version of the NT: the Epistle of Barnabas, and the Shepherd of Hermas.

    Similar variations from the contents of later Bibles occur in other ancient MSS and in other lists of books accepted for reading in the church.

    In addition to the inclusion of books not found in many modern English Bibles, Sinaiticus also has some other surprises for us:

    1. Some words are not written out in full, but simply represented by abbreviations. This may seem a minor point, but it raises the issue of how obsessive we wish to be about the individual words that constitute the sacred text. And the words are not insignificant terms, but the sacra nomina: God, Jesus, Christ, Lord, and similar words.
    2. All of the texts is written in capitals, without any spaces between words, and with no punctuation. Without spaces and punctuation the meaning is often uncertain and needs to be decided by the reader.
    3. Further scribes over 800 years or so have made some changes to correct what they saw as omissions and other errors. This was an ancient MS that kept evolving for almost 1,000 years. Similar developments have been studied in other major codices.
    4. Some of the books in Sinaiticus (and also in other ancient MSS) are longer or shorter than the forms we know for the same biblical books from the KJV.
    5. Finally, for now, we can note that Sinaiticus has some important textual variations so that a number of passages long accepted as part of the Bible and therefore included in the KJV are now left out of modern Bibles. This is good news for those of us not so keen on handling poisonous snakes in worship, as those verses from the end of Mark 16 have now been removed from our Bibles!

    The Bible seems to be less fixed, and rather more ‘plastic’, than we might have anticipated. It has changed its contents in minor and major ways from time to time and from one place to another.

    Very few of these changes involve major theological issues. However, it is time for the ecclesiastical ostrich to pull her head from the sand and take seriously the kind of book we actually have in the Bible.

    There is no ancient copy of the Bible that matches exactly with a modern Bible.

    We do not have the original for any of the books in the Bible, but only copies of copies of copies.

    Indeed, with hand-written documents the very idea of an ‘original’ document is questionable. As such a book is hand-copied, another original document is formed. There was very little capacity for ‘version control’ of documents in the ancient world, and readers back then were less naive about that than many modern Christians seem to be.

    As early as Jeremiah, we find warnings about the lying pens of the scribes (Jer 8:8); and Ignatius of Antioch (Phila 8:2) prefers the “unalterable archives” of Jesus’ death and resurrection over the written documents of the church.

    In which ever way we imagine the Bible to function in the life of the church, we must have a view of Scripture that is realistic about the contingent nature of its contents and the vagaries of its transmission through time.

    We do not have a perfect Bible, nor do we have a perfect church or a perfect reader. We can kid ourselves otherwise, but in the end we must adopt a mature outlook.

    This is the real Bible that we actually possess. It did not drop out of heaven fully formed, and its journey through time has been marked by controversy and sanctity.

    A diverse text

    At this point in time we have an agreed reconstruction of the ancient biblical texts based on the best judgements of scholars from a wide range of faith traditions. No ancient MS matches the latest edition of the Biblica Hebraica the Septuagint, or the Greek New Testament.

    However, the diversity within Scripture is more extensive than textual variations, or differences over which books to include and the order in which they should be arranged.

    The more important diversity that needs to be accommodated as we read Scripture relates to the variations in genre within the Bible.

    Richard Burridge was referring to this very point in his sermon here just two weeks ago.

    In the second session of the BIBLE360 seminar we explore some of the different genre to be found within the Bible, including:

    • narratives: stories, history, legends, gospels, acts
    • lists: genealogies, places, tribes, heroes
    • laws: rules and regulations for religion as well as everyday life
    • prophetic texts: oracles, promises, sermons, threats
    • liturgical texts: especially the Psalms
    • wisdom literature: Proverbs, Job, Ecclesiastes
    • letters: especially in NT, but also in OT
    • apocalyptic writings: especially Daniel & Revelation

    If we mistake the genre, and read hyperbole as regulation (for example), we end up with gross mistakes in our interpretation of Scripture. We would also have churches full of blind people, who had torn out their eyes, and amputees who had removed their hands.

    When this happens—as it often has done in the history of the church—well-meaning but mistaken people turn religion into a toxic recipe rather than the elixir of life. All too often the Scriptures have become ‘texts of terror’ endorsing ethnic cleansing, homophobia, patriarchy, racism, slavery, violence, and xenophobia.

    Sometimes the Bible is indeed guilty of celebrating and promoting such atrocities. In such cases we need to have the integrity to reject such teaching, and turn away from such evil practices.

    Some of the time when the Bible is invoked in support of power and privilege the problem lies with the reader rather than the text.

    The creationism debate arises from a total misunderstanding of both the contents and the genre of the Bible. Rather than embrace the wonderful new insights into the universe being gifted to us by the sciences, some people of faith persist in reading the creation myth of Genesis 1 as if it were a description of how God created the world.

    Category error. Genre mistake. Garbage in, garbage out.

    When we tune our reading of the Scripture to the appropriate settings for the genre being read, we are open to new wisdom for our lives.

    In the BIBLE360 seminars participants explore different biblical texts, noting their genre, and exploring some of the ways in which their favourite Bible passages can be read (or cannot be read).

    We also discover the power of imagination to assist us in entering into the world of the texts, and being surprised by joy at the fresh insights this can open up for us.

    The Bible in the Life of the Church

    One of the most challenging aspects of a BIBLE360 seminar is not the discovery of the vagaries of the Bible’s own history, or the immense diversity of its literary forms, but rather the questions that arise around the use of the Bible in our own lives and in the life of the church.

    At one extreme, we may know people who still use the Bible like a promise box. Some here may know I mean, but for others (thankfully) the allusion will break down. Error 404.

    The ‘promise box’ was a small cardboard container inside which were placed dozens of small pieces of paper, each carefully rolled to form a tiny tube. On each piece of paper was printed a verse from the Bible with a ‘promise’ thought to be relevant to Christian life. These were selected at random, using a very small pair of metal tongs.

    Such a verse-a-day approach to reading the Bible places the reader at the centre of the process, and totally ignores the context of the biblical verse being picked. These words are timeless, unrelated to historical context, and directly relevant to me personally. While many people found this a helpful devotional practice, I consider it barely better than checking the stars in the newspaper.

    At the other end of the spectrum, we have high-level commissions of the national and international church comprising a careful balance of well-qualified people from different theological perspectives, seeking to determine the meaning of Scripture for the church today on controversial questions such as conception and fertility, sexuality and gender, stem-cell research, refugees, climate change, or end of life issues. No random picking of Bible verses here. But no clear and simple answers either.

    In our seminar we review our church’s received traditions about the importance of the Scriptures, and explore some of the ways in which we encounter the Bible in the life of the church. We appreciate how Scripture permeates our worship, but we also note how some parts of the Bible are rarely heard in the liturgy, or carefully side-stepped in our personal and collective lives.

    As part of this segment in the BIBLE360 seminars we take up the challenge of Richard Burridge for our reading of Scripture to begin with Jesus. As followers of Jesus it is his words and his actions that create the lens through which we read the Bible.

    This does not mean we find Jesus hiding under every rock in the Old Testament, but it does mean we read those ancient Jewish texts with Christian eyes. We respect their Jewishness, and affirm the Jewish readings of their own sacred texts which are also the larger portion of our own Bible—but we read the Bible as Christians; indeed as Anglicans!

    We neither seek nor offer a package that explains the Bible, imposes a unity across its many different documents, or requires us to read the Scriptures in one particular way. But we do affirm the belief that nothing matters more in the Christian life than engaging with the Bible.

    As I have found myself saying at these seminars, “I can imagine being a Christian without a church, but not without a Bible” With the Bible—and the support of other disciples of Jesus—I can rebuild the church. Without the Bible, I could never be sure my church was faithful to the legacy of Jesus. And as a Christian, that matters to me.

    Conclusion

    The final stage in a BIBLE360 seminar is for people to determine their own response to all this. We share some practical ideas about reading the Bible, accessing the resources we need, finding a small group of people with whom to share our study of Scripture.

    By the end of the seminar, however, it comes down to the individual response each participant makes.

    These seminars include information, but they are not just about acquiring more knowledge.

    These seminars encourage us to see the Bible afresh, but they are not just an enjoyable day spent working with Scripture.

    These seminars invite participants to make explicit personal plans for their own engagement with Scripture, and to decide what they will do about getting started on those plans … in the next week.

    I offer the same invitation to you here this evening.

    We can sit in this cathedral and hear others talk about the Bible. We can stay behind for a few minutes to argue with the preacher about our favourite theological hobby horse. Or we can quietly determine right now that this week the Bible will get more attention from us than it did last week.

    Whether that happens or not is entirely your call.

  • Pentecost 13B (26 August 2012)

    Contents

    Lectionary

    • I Kings 8:(1,6,10-11),22-30,41-43 & Psalm 84 (or Joshua 24:1-2a, 14-18 & Psalm 34:15-22)
    • Ephesians 6:10-20
    • John 6:56-69

     

    Introduction

    It may be helpful to think of these readings as each engaging in some way with the theme of taking sides:

    • 1 Kings 8: God takes up residence in Jerusalem’s Temple
    • Joshua 24: Israel renews its loyalty to God under the covenant
    • Ephesians 6: Faith as a struggle against the cosmic powers
    • John 6: Division between Jesus’ disciples over his meaning

     

    First Reading: Solomon dedicates the Temple

    The prayer of Solomon at the dedication of the Temple in Jerusalem provides an opportunity for the prophetic story teller to articulate some key themes of the Deuteronomistic reformation that is described in 2 Kings 22-23. This prayer is one of several speeches that provided the narrator with strategic opportunities to present the theological framework for the unfolding story.
    Other speeches composed by the so-called Deuteronomist and placed on the lips of key characters include:

    • Moses (Deut 1:1-4:43) – historical review and a call to Torah obedience
    • Moses (Deut 6:1-11:32) – sermon as prelude to the recital of the Torah (chs 12-26)
    • Moses (Deut 31:30-32:43) – the “Song of Moses”
    • Moses (Deut 33:1-29) – the Blessing of Moses
    • Joshua (Josh 24:1-15) – Covenant renewal ceremony speech
    • Samuel (1Sam 12:1-25) – Samuel’s speech at the coronation of Saul
    • Nathan (2Sam 7:1-29) – Nathan’s oracle about the House of David

    This literary device is also found in other biblical books with lengthy prayers and speeches attributed to such characters as:

    • Ezra (Neh 9:6-37)
    • Daniel (Dan 9:1-19)

    and various figures in Luke-Acts:

    • Jesus (Luke 4)
    • Peter (Acts 2 & 10-11)
    • Stephen (Acts 7)
    • James (Acts 15)
    • Paul (Acts 13, 17, 20, 22, 24 & 26)

    The prayer of Solomon is a fiction created by the narrator to communicate important theological concerns of the time when Joshua, Judges, 1&2 Samuel and 1&2 Kings were being created as a prophetic recital of the story of Israel/Judah. The theme of covenant faithfulness was central to their concerns, with each king being assessed according to his loyalty to the beliefs and values of the prophetic circles driving the reform movement in the time of Josiah (640-609 BCE).

    This reformation is known as the deuteronomistic movement because its ideas are given classical expression in the book of Deuteronomy, some portion of which may have been the “book of the Torah” found in the Jerusalem Temple during its refurbishment during the reign of Josiah:

    The high priest Hilkiah said to Shaphan the secretary, “I have found the book of the law in the house of the LORD.” When Hilkiah gave the book to Shaphan, he read it. Then Shaphan the secretary came to the king, and reported to the king, “Your servants have emptied out the money that was found in the house, and have delivered it into the hand of the workers who have oversight of the house of the LORD.” Shaphan the secretary informed the king, “The priest Hilkiah has given me a book.” Shaphan then read it aloud to the king. When the king heard the words of the book of the law, he tore his clothes. Then the king commanded the priest Hilkiah, Ahikam son of Shaphan, Achbor son of Micaiah, Shaphan the secretary, and the king’s servant Asaiah, saying, “Go, inquire of the LORD for me, for the people, and for all Judah, concerning the words of this book that has been found; for great is the wrath of the LORD that is kindled against us, because our ancestors did not obey the words of this book, to do according to all that is written concerning us.” [2Kings 22:8-13]

    As that story itself indicates, the Temple in Jerusalem played an important role in the history of the Jewish people. Destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 BCE, its reconstruction (albeit on a more modest scale) was one of the first priorities of the post-exilic community under the leadership of prophets like Haggai and Zechariah. Centuries later, Herod the Great would seek to cultivate popular support by a grand scheme to refurbish and enlarge the Temple. That also served as a major work creation program as the project lasted many decades. The recent completion of the Herodian Temple, and its success in attracting vast wealth from pious Jews around the Roman Empire, may have been a factor in the Jewish uprising in 66 CE. Four years later the Temple again lay in ruins. In modern Israel, the dream of rebuilding the Temple is again a focus for fanatical Jewish nationalists and a visit to the Temple Mount site in late 2001 by the then Opposition Leader, Ariel Sharon, triggered the second Palestinian uprising (intifada).

    Pictures and historical notes on the Temple Mount site
    Psalm 122 evokes a timeless sense of the significance of the city and its Temple, while invoking peace on all who love her:

    I was glad when they said to me, “Let us go to the house of the LORD!”
    Our feet are standing within your gates, O Jerusalem.
    Jerusalem–built as a city that is bound firmly together.
    To it the tribes go up, the tribes of the LORD,
    as was decreed for Israel, to give thanks to the name of the LORD.
    For there the thrones for judgment were set up, the thrones of the house of David.
    Pray for the peace of Jerusalem: “May they prosper who love you.
    Peace be within your walls, and security within your towers.”
    For the sake of my relatives and friends I will say, “Peace be within you.”
    For the sake of the house of the LORD our God, I will seek your good.

    Joshua renews the Covenant

    As already mentioned, the stirring speech by Joshua is another literary device fashioned by the Deuteronomist. These anonymous prophets of the biblical past are the unsung heroes of our spiritual tradition. They created a way of seeing the past that shaped their present and gave it a future. They did this so well that their story has become our story, even when we find ourselves dissenting from its narrow ethnic focus or pressing a wider vision of God’s justice for women, the poor, or homosexuals.

    We acknowledge – but do not explicitly address in this week’s notes – the historical and ethical problems bound up in these canonical texts.

    What we find expressed in this ancient legend of a covenant ceremony led by Joshua after the bloody conquest of Canaan is a prophetic glimpse of a different social order than one where power is concentrated in the hands of a ruler and his immediate retainers. This elite view of power holds sway in the corporate board room as much as in the royal palace.

    Israel’s Scriptures preserve another perspective. For the prophets, the “efficiency” of a king could only be tolerated if the “powers that be” were subservient to the values of the covenant. In that older covenant tradition, the obligations and the blessings extended to all the members of the community; not just to the king. This prophetic tradition has been for the most part the way less traveled, as men of religion seem to prefer to imagine God’s dealings with humanity as a secret deal giving privileges to the powerful.

    Can we recapture something of the collective identity that sees our destiny as bound up with one another? Can we say like Joshua, “As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord?” Can we enlarge our vision of “household” to include all humanity, and even the planet as a whole?

    Second Reading: Engaged in a Cosmic Conflict

    This passage concludes the series of readings from Ephesians.

    The selection develops the theme of a cosmic struggle between good and evil, now expressed in terms that seem more at home in a Gnostic document but also with parallels in authentic Pauline passages such as Rom 8:37-39:

    For I am convinced that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor rulers,
    nor things present, nor things to come, nor powers,
    nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation,
    will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.

    The author engages in a fascinating piece of theological reflection upon the military equipment of a Roman soldier to encourage the readers to “stand firm:”

    • belt [truth]
    • breastplate [justice/righteousness]
    • shoes [good news of peace]
    • shield [faith/faithfulness]
    • helmet [salvation]
    • sword [Spirit]

    One of my most vivid memories of a Sunday School graduation class involves a dramatic presentation of this passage with a young man dressed progressively in each item before another figure (dressed as Satan) unsuccessfully threw darts at the him! While the metaphor is vivid, we might wonder at Jesus’ disciples embracing such military imagery in their spirituality. One can hardly imagine Jews engaging in a similar reflection on the equipment of a Nazi SS officer in the decades following World War II.

    A willingness to use such metaphors in their religious literature may be another pointer that this book comes from a time later in the 1C, when the majority of Christians would have found it easy to identify with the character of a Roman soldier. These would not be Jewish Christians around the time of the Jewish War (66-73 CE).

    The theological problem posed by militarism in Christianity is captured nicely in this extract from Walter Wink:

    When, beginning with the emperor Constantine, the Christian church began receiving referential treatment by the empire that it had once so steadfastly opposed, war, which had once seemed so evil, now appeared to many to be a necessity for preserving and propagating the gospel.

    Christianity’s weaponless victory over the Roman empire eventuated in the weaponless victory of the empire over the gospel. No defeat is so well disguised as victory! In the year 303, Diocletian forbade any member of the Roman army to be a Christian. By the year 416, no one could be a member of the Roman army unless he was a Christian.

    It fell to Augustine (d. 430) to make the accommodation of Christianity to its new status as a privileged religion in support of the state. Augustine believed, on the basis of Matt. 5:38-42, that Christians had no right to defend themselves from violence. But he identified a problem which no earlier theologian had faced: what Augustine regarded as the loving obligation to use violence if necessary to defend the innocent against evil. Drawing on Stoic just war principles, he articulated the position that was to dominate church teaching from that time right up to the present. Ever since, Christians on the left and on the right, in the East and in the West, have found it exceedingly easy to declare as “just” and divinely ordained any wars their governments desired to wage for purely national interests. As a consequence, the world regards Christians as among the most warlike factions on the face of the earth. And little wonder; two-thirds of the people killed in the last 500 years died at the hands of fellow-Christians in Europe, to say nothing of those whom Christians killed in the course of colonizing the rest of the world.

    As Gandhi once quipped, “The only people on earth who do not see Christ and His teachings as nonviolent are Christians.”

     

    Gospel: Divisions over Jesus

    This week’s Gospel concludes the extended series on the Bread of Heaven theme from John 6. Next week the major lectionaries all revert to Mark, the default Gospel for Year B in the three year cycle.

    It is something of a surprise to read (6:59) that Jesus has been delivering this discourse in the synagogue at Capernaum, since the action has all seemed to be outdoors until this note.

    John now describes a conflict within the band of disciples (not between Jesus and “the Jews” such as we often find in GJohn). Some of the disciples find this teaching about eating Jesus’ body and drinking his blood to be offensive. As John tells the tale, this is evidence that they were not blessed by the Father with the spiritual disposition required for discipleship.

    The Johannine community had evidently experienced painful schism towards the end of the 1C, with those who had separated even earning the new label, “antichrists:”

    Children, it is the last hour!
    As you have heard that antichrist is coming,
    so now many antichrists have come.
    From this we know that it is the last hour.
    They went out from us,
    but they did not belong to us;
    for if they had belonged to us,
    they would have remained with us.
    But by going out they made it plain
    that none of them belongs to us. [1John 2:18-19]

    Something of that painful experience—of separation from those who cannot embrace the idea of Jesus as the human (flesh and blood) face of God—is seen in another passage of 1John 4:1-3:

    Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; for many false prophets have gone out into the world. By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world.

    The readers of the Gospel are to imitate Peter who responds (6:68-69) when asked if the remaining disciples will also abandon Jesus:

    “Lord, to whom can we go? You have the words of eternal life. We have come to believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.”

     

    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 12B (19 August 2012)

    Contents

    Introduction

    It may be helpful to consider this week’s set of readings as exploring the question: How do we find ourselves dining at Wisdom’s table?

    In various ways the readings all seem to touch on some aspect of this question:

    • King Solomon chooses Wisdom as the gift of supreme worth. [1 Kings 3]
    • Lady Wisdom builds a house, sets a feast and sends out the invitations. [Proverbs 9 – alternative reading]
    • Christians are urged to be fill themselves with the Spirit rather than wine. [Ephesians 5]
    • Jesus is the bread that comes down from heaven and gives life to all who eat it. [John 6]

     

    First Reading: Solomon succeeds David

    At one level the RCL first reading simply tells of the succession as Solomon assumes power following the death of David.

    When the historical questions are considered, we realise that there are many unanswered questions. Despite extensive and well-funded Israeli excavations around the City of David site in Jerusalem, archaeologists have not found any evidence of the kind of urban development presupposed by the biblical legends of David and Solomon. At sites beyond Jerusalem (such as Meggido in the north), substantial building projects and fortifications that were once readily ascribed to Solomon have now been re-dated to much later periods. Like the description of his harem comprising 700 princesses and 300 concubines, Solomon’s geopolitical significance may have been exaggerated by the biblical story-teller.

    The theological questions in this story deal with the issue of what kind of disposition is appropriate for someone chosen to lead the community of God’s people. The description of the young ruler is a little surprising. He goes to the major shrine of the time, at Gibeon (in the tribal territory of Benjamin), whereas we might have expected him to go to the temporary shrine housing the Ark of the Covenant in Jerusalem.
    Gibeon was also a traditional Israelite (northern) site, and not a place with strong attachments to the southern tribes most associated with David:

    • Josh 9:3-27 The Bible knows a tradition that this stronghold was subdued without conquest, and that the people there provided timber and water for Israel.
    • Josh 10:1-43 Gibeon is the site of famous battle where God makes the sun stand still in the sky. (Interestingly, some people are more concerned to explain how such a thing can happen rather than to address the issues of genocide and ethnic cleansing implicit in such tales.)
    • Josh 18:25; 21:17 Gibeon is listed in the tribal territory of Benjamin and was identified as a Levitical city .
    • 2 Sam 2:12-28; 3:30 The famous pool of Gibeon features in a contest between twelve young champions from North and South.

    From the perspective of the story-teller, what was most needed was not a ruler with priestly inclinations (although Solomon would come to be remembered as the patron of the Temple) or even with a willingness to take advice from the prophetic texts (as asserted in Deut 17:18f). Rather, what is needed is the gift of wisdom. The one who chooses wisdom will also then receive everything else, since only a truly wise person can both acquire and profitably use power, wealth, etc.

    If, as many NT scholars believe, Jesus consciously drew on the wisdom traditions of ancient Israel, we may have an echo this principle in the following Kingdom saying from the Sayings Gospel Q: “Seek <first> God’s Empire, then everything else will be granted you.”
    Ancient Israel’s wisdom tradition comes into sight in a story such as this. The location within an ancient society where the wisdom tradition is to be found is precisely in the retainers who depend upon the king for their livelihood and whose services were in turn needed by the ruler. The court was a patron for learning, and stories such as this tale of Solomon choosing wisdom provided an excellent training module for sages in the ancient equivalent of a Humanities program. Not surprisingly, the wisdom writings in the Bible are the most international of the Bible’s texts and also the least interested in distinctively Israelite traditions such as the covenant. In those same circles, Solomon (the most “oriental” of Judah’s rulers) becomes the “patron saint” of wisdom, with several biblical and post-biblical works attributed to him: Proverbs, Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Wisdom of Solomon, Psalms of Solomon, and the Odes of Solomon.
    The alternative first reading from Proverbs 9 picks up the image of Lady Wisdom known to us from several biblical passages.

    In this passage Lady Sophia is portrayed as a wealthy householder. She has built a substantial house with seven strong pillars, slaughtered the animals for a feast, prepared the drinks, and dispatched her slave girls to summon the guests. Like the unwilling host in Jesus’ parable of the Feast, but in her case willingly, Lady Wisdom hosts a banquet to which all are welcome. This is very strong portrayal of a female character for a biblical text, and suggests that at least some women could be imagined as persons of wealth and influence.

     

    Second Reading: Drink the wine that God provides

    The Ephesians passage represents another theme within the Wisdom literature: sobriety and decorum in public conduct. In this case we have an implicit contrast between the excessive drinking that is a hallmark of a grand party, and the religious ideal of a more sober person whose satisfaction comes from the overwhelming presence of the Spirit. Interestingly, given the wisdom genre of the OT texts, Eph 5:15 begins with the classic call to wise living.

    One of the characteristic differences between Torah-centric Jewish wisdom texts (such as Sirach 24) and the Christian texts is that Jesus has now replaced the Torah as the embodiment of the divine wisdom.

    Gospel: Eat my flesh, drink my blood

    In traditional theology, this week’s passage from John 6 has been understood as the Johannine version of the words of institution (found embedded in the Last Supper story in the Synoptics and also attested in 1Cor 11:23-26).

    When read through the lens of an early Christian community that understood Jesus as divine Wisdom (Logos) in human form, this passage can perhaps be understood as a midrash that combines traditional Exodus traditions (the manna in the wilderness) with a view of Jesus as the new embodiment of the same divine Wisdom that was believed by Jewish writers of the time to have journeyed with the Israelites in the wilderness:

    Wisdom prospered their works by the hand of a holy prophet.
    2They journeyed through an uninhabited wilderness,
    and pitched their tents in untrodden places.
    3They withstood their enemies and fought off their foes.
    4When they were thirsty, they called upon you,
    and water was given them out of flinty rock,
    and from hard stone a remedy for their thirst. [WisSol 11:1-4]

    John 6:51-58 can be understood as a Christological reinterpretation of the ancient motif of Lady Wisdom setting a banquet and calling any who seek life to come and join the feast. As such it may represent a creative blending of a historical memory of Jesus’ practice of open commensality with early Christian Sophia Christology.

    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.