Tag: lectionary

Pentecost 11B (12 August 2012)

Lectionary

2 Samuel 18:5-9,15,31-33 & Psalm 130
Ephesians 4:25-5:2
John 6:35, 41-51

First Reading: The death of Absalom

The narrative in 2 Samuel has now advanced several years. David is now a much an older man and his several adult children are wreaking havoc within the dynasty and the nation in fulfillment of Nathan’s prophecy in 2 Sam 12:11-12. In particular, the prediction that David’s wives and concubines would be taken from him and publicly ravaged by another man, has been fulfilled in the rebellion led by his son, Absalom.

The RCL spares us the sordid story, and takes us into the climax of the struggle for control of the throne. In an ironic twist, David’s men go into battle against the army of Israel with high casualties on both sides. The army of Israel is defeated and Absalom himself is captured and (contrary to David’s explicit instructions) killed. David’s concern for his son, and his grief at Absalom’s demise, make a powerful scene in a classic literary narrative from the ancient world.

In preparing for this week’s services, it may be helpful to read the complete narrative:

Amnon rapes Absalom’s sister, Tamar (2Sam 13:1-22)
Absalom murders Amnon (2Sam 13:23-33)
Absalom goes into exile (2Sam 13:34-39)
Absalom returns to court (2Sam 14:1-33)
Absalom cultivates popular support (2Sam 15:1-6)
Absalom seizes power in a coup (2Sam 15:7-12)
David flees and prepares to fight back (2Sam 15:13-17:29)
Absalom’s forces defeated (2Sam 18:1-19:8a)
David is restored to power (2Sam 19:8b-43)
David suppresses northern resistance (2Sam 20:1-26)

This complex of stories makes up a considerable percentage of 2 Samuel and must therefore be assumed to have particular significance to the prophetic story-tellers who put together this “complex-chain narrative.” It is most likely that this sorry saga of failure and betrayal was seen as a paradigm of the nation as a whole, and functioned to explain theologically the demise of the nation in the face of Babylonian conquest.

In The Origin Tradition of Ancient Israel (JSOTS 55. Sheffield, 1987) Thomas L. Thompson has established that ancient Hebrew story-tellers were adept at creating new stories of considerable length and complexity using traditional stories and motifs.

Second Reading: Holy living

This passage provides an excellent example of early Christian paraenesis, or moral instruction. Having surveyed several major theological themes in the earlier part of the letter, the author now turns to provide explicit practical instruction on holy living.

Gospel: Glimpses of a tradition developing over time

Jesus, son of Joseph

The GJohn is well-known for its complex and highly-developed theology. Less recognized is the same Gospel’s capacity to preserve historical nuggets that would otherwise be lost to us. One of those may be surfacing here in the reference to Jesus as the “son of Joseph” and the comfort with which the Johannine story-teller can describe Jesus’ opponents as saying they know his “father and mother.”
In chapters 6, 7 and 8 we find casual references to Jesus’ parentage or birth place that are at odds with the later Christian tradition:
son of Joseph, we know his father and mother …

They were saying, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?” [John 6:42]

not born in Bethlehem

When they heard these words, some in the crowd said, “This is really the prophet.” Others said, “This is the Messiah.” But some asked, “Surely the Messiah does not come from Galilee, does he? Has not the scripture said that the Messiah is descended from David and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David lived?” So there was a division in the crowd because of him. Some of them wanted to arrest him, but no one laid hands on him. [John 7:40-44]

at least we know our father!

They answered him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing what Abraham did, but now you are trying to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are indeed doing what your father does.” They said to him, “We are not illegitimate children; we have one father, God himself.” [John 8:39-41]

not yet 50 years of age

Your ancestor Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day; he saw it and was glad.” Then the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, before Abraham was, I am.” [John 8:56-58]

It is not clear just what the tradition behind GJohn knew about Jesus’ family origins, but it is hard to imagine that a Christian author who was familiar with either Matthew or Luke could have written these words. It may simply be that we need to acknowledge that within the first 100 years there were Christians who had no trouble speaking of Joseph as Jesus’ biological father, and did not know (or did not accept) the tradition of Jesus being born at Bethlehem. In GJohn the most complex Christology and the simplest biology stand side by side.

Apart from our interest in recovering Jesus’ biological origins, this Johannine passage is also interesting in another way. The words attributed to the crowd (“Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”) seem remarkably close to the words of the crowd in Nazareth when Jesus is rejected by his own townsfolk:

Mark 6:2-3
“Where did this man get all this? What is this wisdom that has been given to him? What deeds of power are being done by his hands! Is not this the carpenter, the son of Mary and brother of James and Joses and Judas and Simon, and are not his sisters here with us?” And they took offense at him.

Matthew 13:54-56
“Where did this man get this wisdom and these deeds of power? Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary? And are not his brothers James and Joseph and Simon and Judas? And are not all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all this?”

Luke 4:22
All spoke well of him and were amazed at the gracious words that came from his mouth. They said, “Is not this Joseph’s son?”

It is possible that John 6:42 preserves another version of the tradition first seen in Mark 6.

Unless the Father draws them …

The Jesus portrayed by the author of GJohn speaks of those who will not come to him to receive the bread of life because the Father has not drawn them.

In some Christian circles, this has been interpreted as an expression of a divine decision to choose certain individuals (or even classes of people) for salvation, while intentionally consigning the remainder of humanity (and all of non-human creation) to destruction.

It may be helpful to place this text alongside some other statements of the Johannine Jesus:

I have other sheep that do not belong to this fold.
I must bring them also, and they will listen to my voice.
So there will be one flock, one shepherd. [GJohn 10:16]

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.
No one comes to the Father except through me. [GJohn 14:6]

How are these different voices to be heard?

It seems clear that we are dealing with a self-conscious Christian community that is deeply aware of its identity over and against the Torah observant synagogue communities (known as “the Jews” in GJohn), and also as different from (yet somehow connected to) the other Jesus communities, such as those associated with the Pauline mission, the Q community in Galilee, or even the Thomas Christians.

GJohn 6 certainly expresses an awareness that some people, and particularly many of the Jews, will simply not accept Jesus as the bread of life, the one sent from God. For these Johannine Christians, Jesus was the only pathway they could now acknowledge (as expressed in GJohn 14:6). Yet there was also a sense that Jesus had sheep in “other pens” (GJohn 10:16).

As disciples of Jesus in the 21C, we do not simply face the traditional questions of other Christian communities with different traditions than those we have practiced (ecumenism). Nor do we simply have to re-visit the age-old question of Jewish-Christian relationships as we acknowledge that Judaism is not fading away and that Jesus himself was never a Christian. We find ourselves pushed even further out into the deep waters. What about those other religions that simply were not known either to Jesus or to his earliest followers?

Can we interpret this harsh saying of Jesus not as a declaration of eternal predestination to salvation for a select few, but rather as a statement acknowledging that the Father does not draw every human person to Jesus? For them, we might imagine Jesus saying that God’s generous love provides other pathways to life.

Jesus Database

353 Bread of Life

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.

6 August 2012

Pentecost 10B (5 August 2012)

Lectionary

2 Samuel 11:26-12:13a & Psalm 51:1-12
Ephesians 4:1-16
John 6:24-35

First Reading

This week’s first reading in the RCL continues the story of David’s sexual liaison with Bath-Sheba, the wife of one of his senior officers. Having arranged for Uriah to be murdered on the battlefront, David is now able to add Bath-Sheba to his collection of wives.

The heart of the story concerns God’s rebuke of David for his sin. This was couched in the famous parable of the poor farmer whose only sheep was taken for the pleasure of a rich neighbor who had many many animals in his flock.

The use of such “case studies” when seeking to gain the ruler’s decision on a particular case is also known from other stories in the OT. A similar device appears in 2Sam 14 when a woman from Tekoa (later the home village of the prophet Amos) is used by another of David’s officials to engage the king on a difficult personal matter.

The punishment that befalls David and Bath-Sheba is harsh and unremitting. The child born as a result of their passion will become ill and die. Worse still, if that is possible, their family will never be free from intrigue and violence:

Now therefore the sword shall never depart from your house,
for you have despised me,
and have taken the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your wife.
Thus says the LORD:
“I will raise up trouble against you from within your own house;
and I will take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your neighbor,
and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this very sun.
For you did it secretly;
but I will do this thing before all Israel,
and before the sun.”

This grim prophecy will be worked out in the narratives that follow in 2 Samuel and 1 Kings.

While the narrative corrects the abuse perpetrated by David, the story still leaves much to be desired as a moral text. There is no hint of challenging the royal prerogative to take other men’s wives, nor indeed to enjoy sexual relations with multiple partners drawn from the harem. We are still very much in an ancient patriarchal society. There is little of the “Kingdom values” proclaimed by Jesus in such a story.

Like so much of the biblical texts — including such cultural icons as the Ten Commandments — the social realities reflected here come from, and reinforce, a world made by and for men.

Second Reading

In Eph 4:1-6 we have a number of phrases intended to promote a sense of unity in a Christian community whose unity had been problematic: one body, one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God …

“Faith” here seems to have moved from being a trusting attitude towards God (as seen in Jesus’ own practice and in the authentic writings of Paul) to become a noun, an “object” that is held and treasured. If that is correct, then this may another clue that we are dealing with a late 1C author whose views on this point are not unlike those found in Jude 3 (“contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints”).

These words continue to play a role in today’s church communities through their use in liturgies such as baptism services. That alone would make them words with a remarkable shelf life, and expressions of a deep continuity across the centuries.
The second part of this passage (vss. 7-16), develops the idea of underlying unity so as to include a diversity of gifts and ministries within the faith community.

It is not necessary to see lists such as we find here and in 1Cor 12:4-11 as definitive for church life in subsequent generations. It may be better to see both lists as time capsules that preserve a snapshot of how the early Christian communities associated with Paul organized their own lives together.

One of the interesting things to note is that the earlier snapshot (1Cor 12) tends to speak of functions, while the later document (Eph 4) now speaks of functionaries:

1 Cor 12:4-11

12:4 Now there are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit; 12:5 and there are varieties of services, but the same Lord; 12:6 and there are varieties of activities, but it is the same God who activates all of them in everyone. 12:7 To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.

12:8 To one is given through the Spirit the utterance of wisdom,
and to another the utterance of knowledge according to the same Spirit,
12:9 to another faith by the same Spirit,
to another gifts of healing by the one Spirit,
12:10 to another the working of miracles,
to another prophecy,
to another the discernment of spirits,
to another various kinds of tongues,
to another the interpretation of tongues.

12:11 All these are activated by one and the same Spirit, who allots to each one individually just as the Spirit chooses.

Ephesians 4:11-15

4:11 The gifts he gave were that

some would be apostles,
some prophets,
some evangelists,
some pastors
and teachers,

4:12 equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ, 4:13 until all of us come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to maturity, to the measure of the full stature of Christ.

4:14 We must no longer be children, tossed to and fro and blown about by every wind of doctrine, by people’s trickery, by their craftiness in deceitful scheming. 4:15 But speaking the truth in love, we must grow up in every way into him who is the head, into Christ, 4:16 from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by every ligament with which it is equipped, as each part is working properly, promotes the body’s growth in building itself up in love.

What kind of community is presupposed by the description in 1Cor 12? Does the shift from functions exercised to functionaries—with the God-given authority to act within the Church—reflect a more settled vision of Christian community?

If we tried to describe the ways in which the Spirit of God is manifest in our own faith communities, what kind of list would we develop?

Gospel

This is the second in a series of five Sundays that draws on John 6 for the Gospel:

John 6:1-21 – feeding of the 5,000 & Jesus walking on water
John 6:24-35 – controversy over the bread God gives
John 6:35,41-51 – controversy over Jesus
John 6:51-58 – eat my flesh, drink my blood
John 6:56-69 – Jesus loses many disciples

The author moves from the story of the miraculous feeding to the discourse in which “Jesus” will develop the theme of himself being the Bread of Life that comes down from heaven. The transition is made by reference to traditional Jewish expectations that the Messiah’s appearance would be validated by certain “signs,” including miraculous bread from heaven.

As we noted last week, a rabbinic commentary in the fourth century captures these expectations as follows:

Rabbi Berekia said in the name of Rabbi Jicchaq:
As the first redeemer [Moses] so the last redeemer [the Christ].
As it is said of the first redeemer:
And Moses took his wife and his sons and had them ride on an ass (Exod. 4.20),
so the last redeemer, for it is said: Lowly, and riding on an ass (Zech. 9.9).
As the first redeemer caused manna to come down,
for it is said: Lo, I cause bread to rain down upon you from heaven (Exod. 16.4),
so the last redeemer will cause manna to come down,
for it is said: White bread will lie upon the earth (Ps 72.16, Midrash).
As the first redeemer caused the well to spring forth (Num. 20.11),
so the last redeemer will cause water to spring forth,
for it is said: And a fountain will break forth out of the house of Yahweh. (Joel 3.18).

Central to the author’s craft here is the motif of ironic misunderstanding on the part of Jesus’ protagonists:

So when the crowd saw that neither Jesus nor his disciples were there, they themselves got into the boats and went to Capernaum looking for Jesus.
When they found him on the other side of the sea, they said to him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?” Jesus answered them, “Very truly, I tell you, you are looking for me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves. Do not work for the food that perishes, but for the food that endures for eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For it is on him that God the Father has set his seal.” Then they said to him, “What must we do to perform the works of God?” Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.” So they said to him, “What sign are you going to give us then, so that we may see it and believe you? What work are you performing? Our ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” Then Jesus said to them, “Very truly, I tell you, it was not Moses who gave you the bread from heaven, but it is my Father who gives you the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is that which comes down from heaven and gives life to the world.” They said to him, “Sir, give us this bread always.”
Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. Whoever comes to me will never be hungry, and whoever believes in me will never be thirsty.” (John 6:24-35 NRSV)

In the Gospel of John we often find that Jesus says something, or performs some “sign” (his miracles are never simply acts of power in John, but always pointers to some deeper truth), that results in confusion and misunderstanding on the part of the observers. In many cases John seems to delight in using irony in these situations, with the uncomprehending opponents sometimes saying things that are more true than they realise.

Examples of this can be seen in:

Mary and the steward at Cana (ch 2)
Nicodemus (ch 3)
Samaritan woman (ch 4)
Bread from heaven (ch 6)
Confusion over the Messiah’s origins (ch 7, esp. vss 40-44)
Caiaphas’ oracle (11:50)
Pilate and Jesus (see especially the alternative reading for 19:13)

When Jesus challenges and clarifies their misunderstanding in John 6 the crowd responds with a line that echoes the request of the Samaritan woman after Jesus corrects her confusion:

Crowd in 6:34 – “Sir, give us this bread always.”
Woman in 4:15 – “Sir, give me this water, so that I may never be thirsty …”

It is also interesting to note that up until the end of this section, the group of people engaging Jesus in conversation is simply called “the crowd.” However, as their disposition becomes increasingly hostile to Jesus in the following verses, the “crowd” becomes “the Jews.”

This way of describing the opponents of Jesus is especially characteristic of John. Of the 76 examples of this phrase in the Gospels (including duplicates between the synoptics), 62 are found in John. By way of contrast, the phrase occurs only 5 times in the Pauline corpus, and only twice in the Book of Revelation.

The implicit anti-Semitism of this phrase was perhaps not especially significant in the original context, when most Christians were Jewish. However, even in that context, the phrase still reflected the tensions between followers of Jesus and the Torah-observant “Jews” of the synagogue communities. As time passed, the anti-Semitism encoded within such biblical texts developed into theological stereotyping of the Jewish people, ethnic discrimination and murderous pogroms. The final obscenity was the Nazi holocaust.