Thoughts going in, Sunday Nov 18th

Mark 13:1 As He was going out of the temple, one of His disciples said to Him, "Teacher, behold what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!" 2 And Jesus said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another which will not be torn down." 3 As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter and James and John and Andrew were questioning Him privately, 4 "Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign when all these things are going to be fulfilled?" 5 And Jesus began to say to them, "See to it that no one misleads you. 6 "Many will come in My name, saying, 'I am He!' and will mislead many. 7 "When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be frightened; those things must take place; but that is not yet the end. 8 "For nation will rise up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places; there will also be famines. These things are merely the beginning of birth pangs.

            Most evangelicals take this passage to be an "end times" passage which is ironic when you stop to consider that the entire context of what Jesus says in vss 5-8 has to do with what he said in vs 2: And Jesus said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another which will not be torn down. The destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem; it's not an "end times" event. It occurred in 70 BC as a result of the Jewish War against Rome. It's difficult for us today to imagine the impact of the event. It would be the "9-11" of their day--and then some. Joel Marcus, one of the foremost scholars on Mark's Gospel, has an interesting article called "The Jewish War and the Sitz im leben of Mark." Sitz im leben is a German phrase that basically means the "setting," or the "setting in life." In other words, Joel Marcus in his article is contending that the setting in life that produced the Gospel of Mark was the Jewish War. It's a fascinating article that really springs to life when he gets to chapter 13.

            But now the question has to be asked, so what? If chapter 13 isn't about the "end times" and is merely about what happened in Jerusalem a long long time ago under Titus and the Roman Legions, is it merely a history lesson and nothing else?

            Certainly not. If Marcus is correct, the evangelist St. Mark's community was a largely Gentile community in close proximity to the field(s) of battle (think Golan Heights area, for instance). They, as well as the Jewish inhabitants of Jerusalem, were seeing their world rocked. Gas sky-rocketing in price, double-digit unemployment, higher taxes, a politically divided landscape, gridlock in government.... they'd seen the 1st century version of all of that and then some. It was during the tumult of the times that the community drew strength from the collective 'memory of faith' that Jesus had prophesied that these things would happen. Time is in God's hand, after all.

            One commentator points out that it is important to remember the context of these words of Christ. While we, liturgically, focus on this passage at the end of the church year, the words themselves fall within the context of Holy Week. We, thus, want to approach these words in the light of the cross. Also, the phrase 'birth pangs' (vs 8) suggest new life... that even though there is death and despair all around, God is a God who brings new life out of these things. In that sense, what looks like THE END for those going through troublesome times is capable of being used by God to bring about something new. The more we learn about God, the more this makes sense. We call this REDEMPTION.

            In that sense, there is great HOPE in Mark 13. For whether it's seen as a historical reference to the end of the Temple era in Jerusalem, or a prophecy concerning the end of the Age (or both), we can rest assured that thanks to the events of Holy Week... thanks to what Christ did for the world on the cross, we can always hope for and EXPECT that God's redeeming activity will continue on.

Cheers,

TM

Thoughts going in, Sunday Nov 11th

Mark 12:38 As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39 and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 40 They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely." 41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny. 43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on."

            This is one of those passages that **seems clear enough to understand at the surface level. No doubt this is due to the fact that those raised in the church have heard the story of the "Widow's mite" innumerable times. It's a story that blesses the idea that God is capable of doing big things with small gifts. For generations the pennies collected in Sunday School, VBS, and LWML mite boxes have been so-blessed by God so as to keep missionaries on the field, etc. etc.

            All of this is true. God is most certainly able to multiply the effectiveness of small gifts. The primary question, however, is whether **that's** really what's being taught in this story. Perhaps it is... although if I had to hang my hat on a particular passage for God's ability to bless and increase small gifts, I'd probably opt for one of the "miracle of the loaves" feeding stories.

            Well, then, what about the idea that the widow is the exemplar of faith and trust in God? That's another spin that often comes from the story. She gave ALL she had, fully trusting that God would see to her needs. One would certainly like to hope so. Yet to be fair, that's not what it says. In actuality, we have no clue as to what the widow's motivation was. As scholars today point out, she may have been giving all she had out of a mistaken sense of duty urged upon her by the very elite [and corrupt] Temple system that Jesus was just commenting on.

            My point is that now and then we come upon Bible stories that have taken on a narrative that supersedes the actual wording of the text.... and this is one of those times. Jesus NEVER commends the widow's actions. That is a gloss... by which I mean, that's something that OTHERS have read into the text for generations. He points her out. That's all. 43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on." He points out a fact. Never does he say: Go thou and do likewise. He doesn't even say that this poor woman, for all of her efforts, will have treasure in heaven. If Jesus is pointing her out as the ultimate example that others should follow, he isn't being very blunt about it. Many commentators today point out that one could just as easily imagine tears in Jesus eyes as he points her out... as in... look at this poor woman... she's been so manipulated by this corrupt system that she thinks she HAS to give her last two pennies.

            In some ways ... TEXTUALLY... this interpretation actually works better than the widow-as-ultimate-example interpretation. The word "widow" appears twice in the text: 

38 As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39 and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 40 They devour widows' houses

And no sooner are we told to watch out for the teachers of the Law (scribes) because this is what they do, when.... almost like a Shakespearean drama...

41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny

Textually, vss 41-42 serve as an illustration of vs 40 in action. To make the issue even sharper, this "temple treasury" that's being talked about in the text was the equivalent of the "poor box" of yesteryear. It is thus both sad and ironic that a poor widow should be giving her last coins to "help" the very group that she herself would be included in.

I think this passage illustrates a common problem we still see in the church today, and that is the 90-10 principle. 90% of the effort…..the work….the needed support…etc. etc. is coming from a mere 10% of the people. The widow’s gift is much more humble, much more sacrificial, and much more trusting (in God) than any of the lump sums given by ‘major donors.’ The question before the house is really… what would it have been like if those major donors had given with half the humility, sacrifice, and trust of the widow? I really don’t think the widow is here for us to EMULATE. Giving 100% of our resources brings up as many stewardship issues/questions as it would ‘solve.’ I do, however, think she’s here cause us great discomfort. Looking at her gift… and then looking at our own …can very often reveal a tremendous lack of faith.

Cheers,

TM

Thoughts going in, Sunday Nov. 4th

John 11:32 When Mary reached the place where Jesus was and saw him, she fell at his feet and said, "Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died." 33 When Jesus saw her weeping, and the Jews who had come along with her also weeping, he was deeply moved in spirit and troubled. 34 "Where have you laid him?" he asked. "Come and see, Lord," they replied. 35 Jesus wept. 36 Then the Jews said, "See how he loved him!" 37 But some of them said, "Could not he who opened the eyes of the blind man have kept this man from dying?"38 Jesus, once more deeply moved, came to the tomb. It was a cave with a stone laid across the entrance. 39 "Take away the stone," he said. "But, Lord," said Martha, the sister of the dead man, "by this time there is a bad odor, for he has been there four days." 40 Then Jesus said, "Did I not tell you that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?" 41 So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, "Father, I thank you that you have heard me. 42 I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me." 43 When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, "Lazarus, come out!" 44 The dead man came out, his hands and feet wrapped with strips of linen, and a cloth around his face. Jesus said to them, "Take off the grave clothes and let him go."

            This Sunday, as is typical in most Lutheran churches, the festival of All Saints Day will be transferred from Thursday November 1st (its proper day) so as to be able to ensure its celebration by the congregation.

            The history of All Saints day is somewhat obscure. Wikipedia does as good a job as any in terms of citing the things that we do know:

The Western Christian holiday of All Saints' Day falls on 1 November, followed by All Souls' Day on 2 November, and is a Holy Day of Obligation in the Latin Rite of the Catholic Church.

The origin of the festival of All Saints celebrated in the West dates to 13 May 609 or 610, when Pope Boniface IV consecrated the Pantheon at Rome to the Blessed Virgin and all the martyrs; the feast of the dedicatio Sanctae Mariae ad Martyres has been celebrated at Rome ever since. There is evidence that from the fifth through the seventh centuries there existed in certain places and at sporadic intervals a feast date on 13 May to celebrate the holy martyrs. The origin of All Saints' Day cannot be traced with certainty, and it has been observed on various days in different places. However, there are some who maintain the belief that it has origins in the pagan observation of 13 May, the Feast of the Lemures, in which the malevolent and restless spirits of the dead were propitiated. Liturgiologists base the idea that this Lemuria festival was the origin of that of All Saints on their identical dates and on the similar theme of "all the dead".

The feast of All Saints, on its current date, is traced to the foundation by Pope Gregory III (731–741) of an oratory in St. Peter's for the relics "of the holy apostles and of all saints, martyrs and confessors, of all the just made perfect who are at rest throughout the world", with the day moved to 1 November and the 13 May feast suppressed.

This fell on the Celtic holiday of Samhain, which had a theme similar to the Roman festival of Lemuria, but which was also a harvest festival.

            So much for the history. The original point seemed somewhat two-fold:  (1) to uphold the martyrs as the ultimate example in terms of sacrifice. In this way they were revered as the true "heroes" of the faith. (2) Given the recurring pagan emphasis on the occasional/seasonal restlessness of the spirits of the dead, the focus of All Saints seemed intent on reframing the question. Certainly the spirits of the dead were still "alive," but they were not here wreaking havoc; they were in another domain--the heavenly domain, at least in terms of the righteous ones.

            The propers for this week are:  Isaiah 25:6-9; Revelation 21:1-6, and John 11:32-44. Each of these readings have something interesting to contribute to the themes of the day. The Isaiah and Revelation passages seem to have a 'present/future' focus. There is a REAL REALITY now which--although we do not perceive with our senses--can be perceived by faith. Those who have gone on before us in the faith presently occupy this reality. It is a safe, and good reality because it takes place in the presence of God, who acts as Patron, Host, Father, Protector. In addition to this present faith-perceived reality, there is also a future reality held up by these passages. God WILL DO certain things that have not been done yet--the greatest of which will be the end of DEATH. Revelation 21:6 anticipates this ultimate completion of all of God's work with the present tense: it is DONE.

            In contrast to the first two readings, the Gospel reading of the day presents a very earth-bound "this world" template for examining All Saints day. Saints Mary, Martha and Lazarus show us what "normal sainthood" looks like not in the heavenly realm, but right here where we find ourselves... and in that sense John 11 is a perfect passage for our consideration.

            It is very true that we should look to the saints as our "heroes" in the faith, but too often our heroes become idealized to the point of super-human status. There's a current CPH publication that depicts Martin Luther as a Superman-esque, physically fit, muscle-bound figure, that to my mind, seems to be a highly unlikely representation of how he really looked! The point being, if we are guilty of doing this with the physical characteristics of those we venerate, sometimes we're also guilty of doing it in terms of their spiritual characteristics.

            In that sense, John 11 is a great corrective. There's so much to observe. This family, Mary, Martha and Lazarus, are what we today would call good solid Christians. They believe in Christ and practice their faith. Yet, notice that tragedy strikes. As saints they illustrate to us that our saintly relationship with Jesus is not a good luck charm against tragedy. We still experience loss--sometimes unexpected; sometimes loss that seems unfair; before its time, so to speak.

            The passage also treats us to the dialog between the sisters and Jesus. They are respectful as good disciples should be, but they are not totally passive. They actively engage in questioning dialog with Jesus:  Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died, Mary says in vs 32 (Martha says the same thing earlier). So often we get down on ourselves for feeling angry or disappointed in God when things don't turn out the way we want. But God has not created us as robots. We have the full range of human emotions--and Jesus in this text demonstrates his willingness not only to engage in dialog with his saints when those emotions are in full swing, but he also enters into the pain with them, v35 Jesus wept.

            Of course the culmination of the passage is what makes it such an appropriate reading for All Saints Day; the fact that Jesus stands at the entrance of the tomb and shouts: Lazarus, come out! And Lazarus comes out. Here the point is that literally Jesus will have the LAST WORD. This, by the way, is also what makes John 11 a great funeral text. We would all love to stand at the casket of our loved one and say _____ grandma, mom, dad, ... whoever.... GET UP; Come away from that casket!  Yet, as much as we'd like to be able to have that effect, we obviously cannot. The account of what we see going on in John 11 acts as a mini-drama of sorts for what will ultimately happen one day for ALL WHO BELIEVE. This passage cannot help but make us think of St. Paul's words in 1Thess 4: 15 According to the Lord's word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left till the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise...

            All Saints is a festival of HOPE for us all!

Cheers,

TM

Thoughts going in, Sunday Oct 21st

Mark 10:35 Then James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came to him. "Teacher," they said, "we want you to do for us whatever we ask." 36 "What do you want me to do for you?" he asked. 37 They replied, "Let one of us sit at your right and the other at your left in your glory." 38 "You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" 39 "We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with, 40 but to sit at my right or left is not for me to grant. These places belong to those for whom they have been prepared." 41 When the ten heard about this, they became indignant with James and John. 42 Jesus called them together and said, "You know that those who are regarded as rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 43 Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 44 and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. 45 For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many."

            I think it's unfortunate that this week's Gospel reading begins at vs 35, and hence, completely skips over the CONTEXT in which this episode occurs. The context is vss 32-34 where the author makes it explicit that the group as a whole is still on their way to Jerusalem and Jesus gives his third and final (and in many ways, most graphic: They will condemn him to death and will hand him over to the Gentiles, who will mock him and spit on him, flog him and kill him. Three days later he will rise). It is within the context of this graphic passion prediction that James and John approach Jesus with their request for favoritism.

            A straight reading of the narrative seems to imply that in their minds... IF they understood the gravity of what Jesus had just told them, it would seem that they expected Jesus to come into his glory immediately following his rising. In other words, it seems that at the very least they did not envision a life-long process of Christian service, but rather, an immediate apocalyptic-ish event.... followed by life lived in messianic glory.

            If so, one can understand the luster of such a thought. The cross may be intense, but after a brief baptism of fire it's nothing but heaven on earth. I think that Christianity has always wrestled with this sort of theology of glory. Many beloved hymns of the church seem to imply that the believer goes about life snuggled safely within the protective hedge of God. And while this may be true at the spiritual level, it is frequently also implied at the temporal level... leading one to EXPECT that following Jesus will naturally result in being healthy, wealthy and wise. This, then, cannot help but lead to a crisis of faith when the economy collapses, or a terrible disease strikes, etc. I'm currently reading a book about the history of Christianity in the East in areas that are now considered traditionally Muslim. For Christians living at the time of the Islamic conquest it must have seemed like God had 'switched sides,' or at the very least, as though there was no protective hedge around them. The persecuted Church has never had any delusions about the glorious kingdom... she knows we ain't there yet.

            The teaching moment for Jesus in this passage seems to be to try to get his disciples heads out of the clouds and back down to earth. GREATNESS is defined by acts of service and ministry to all. In the Greek, two separate words are used to unpack this idea. Vss 43-44 say: Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant (diakonos), and whoever wants to be first must be slave (doulos) of all. The 2-fold gist of using these words is that greatness in the here-and-now kingdom is a life of diakonia... service, waiting on others "hand and foot" (as the saying goes)... that's what a diakonos did. But then by also using the word 'doulos' (slave/slavery) the sense of being indentured is stressed. The doulos is not his/her own; the doulos has no liberty; the doulos belongs totally to another.

            From the text, it's easy to see "to whom" we belong. Jesus said in vs 45 that he has come to give his life a ransom for many. The Greek word 'lutron' is well-translated as 'ransom.' It's the price paid for captives. Jesus can demand we dedicate our lives as diakonoi and douloi ... Jesus can define greatness in this way because by his death on the cross he has bought us. What's fascinating and in our day worth remembering is that Jesus doesn't demand that we devote ourselves solely to him. What he demands is that we devote ourselves to OTHERS/ALL... which, then, becomes service to him.

            I say this is important to remember in our day because somewhere along the line the idea of one's public witness in and to the world has become perverted. Somewhere along the line Christians have begun to think that God has called them to march with picket signs calling down fire and brimstone on gays and lesbians; or that God has called them to bomb abortion clinics; or that God has called them to a life of judgmental anger against all outsiders. This is NOT evangelism; this is not being a diakonos or a doulos to others. This is not the sort of greatness Christ calls his followers to.

Cheers,

TM