Easter Sunday
Mark 16:1-8
The Sabbath was over, and the women made preparations to anoint the body of Jesus. The unseemly hast prior to the Sabbath had enabled Jesus to be taken down from the cross, but not for proper treatment of the body. As soon as they were able the three women went to the tomb. For them the Sabbath must have seemed unusually long. They were not looking for a day of rest, they were focussed on the task ahead of them. Until the Sabbath was over they were unable to complete that task.
As soon as they could they made their way to the tomb. Having obtained the necessary spices they were now considering the next obstacle – the stone that had been placed across the tomb.
Imagine their surprise when they found that the stone had already been rolled away! We learn nothing of their reaction to finding the stone already moved, but Mark writes that they entered the tomb, and encountered ‘a young man, dressed in a white robe, sitting on the right side; and they were alarmed.’ (16:5). Given all that had transpired, and what must have already been a vulnerable state of mind, it is not surprising. Expecting to find a barrier, there was none. What did they expect to see when they entered the tomb? A dead body perhaps or maybe an empty tomb. Instead they found a living being in a white robe.
This being was a messenger, in Greek messenger is ‘angellos’ or angel, but Mark does not describe him in those words. This young man told them what they already know, but gave them a framework for understanding what they were not seeing. Jesus had been raised from the dead. The place where he had lain was now empty, and Jesus had gone on ahead of the disciples to Galilee. The task the women had was to tell Peter to go back to Galilee.
It is a surprise to us that Mark then reports that the women said nothing to anyone because they had been seized by terror and amazement. In other words they were speechless.
It is here that most of the older authorities end the book of Mark. Some versions add verses 9-16, and round out the chapter, and the story with a neat conclusion that has some parallels in the other gospels.
We like a neat ending, no unfinished business, no unanswered questions, no room for uncertainty. To conclude at verse eight is somehow unsatisfying, yet may be exactly what was originally intended.
The other gospels had Jesus meeting with the disciples in various places and situations. The shorter ending of Mark does not. Instead we find Peter and the other disciples directed back to where it all began, by the shores of Lake Galilee. There they met Jesus when they were going about their ordinary tasks, and there Jesus has promised to meet them again.
For many followers of Jesus this is where we will meet Jesus, and where we are called to follow him. Discipleship is about walking with Jesus, it is about following Jesus in the way. There may not be the dramatic appearance through locked doors, or breakfast provided by the lake, but we will meet Jesus. As we learn his teaching, and try to obey him on our journey through life, we will find that we meet the resurrected Jesus on the way.
Discipleship is not retreat from the world; it is not a matter of isolated meditation far from the realities of life. Discipleship is about walking with Jesus on the dusty roads and in the busyness and messiness of life. It is about encountering people who are broken and hurting and meeting people who have lost their way and purpose in life. Our task is to share with them what we have learned and what we have received from Jesus. As we do this we will know that Jesus has been raised, for we will experience his power and joy in our lives as we share it with others.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Liturgy of the Passion - 3
Mark 15:1-3
"Pilate asked him 'Are you the king of the Jews?' He answered him, 'You say so'" Mark 15:2
The gospel accounts agree on the substance. Jesus was taken before Pilate. While the details may vary it is still God's story, revealed through faithful servants whom the Spirit has inspired to communicate the Truth - and to show us Jesus and the way God has graciously dealt with all of creation since the beginning of time.
Following a brief consultation with the whole council or Sanhedrin Jesus was taken before Pilate. This was to bring the weight of the civil authorities down upon Jesus, for without Pilate's approval there could be no capital punishment
From Mark's sources the incident is brief. Pilate's question about Jesus kingship brings no answer that would condemn Jesus, and the accusations of the chief priests were given no response, Jesus remained silent in the face of his accusers.
John's gospel offers a much fuller account - even a philosophical discussion that would have been appropriate for the Greek mind. The oft quoted line "What is truth?" comes from John's gospel. For the followers of Jesus that question is answered simply by the words of Jesus that prompted that question "Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice."
For John is was truth that was at issue. For Mark that particular dynamic is missing from the words in this part of the narrative, yet is still hidden beneath them. His accusers could not obtain valid testimony against him (14:56), even though they continued to pour forth their accusations (15:3). From Pilate there is no guilty verdict - but Jesus was not set free. Truth became the victim of expediency.
So it is at times with the Word of God. Often the words are lifted out of their context and made into something they are not. The Word becomes a weapon to wield against others. It is no longer a light to guide or a medicine to bring healing to people and relationships. It becomes a means of control rather than a source of liberation. It becomes an immutable and unchangeable set of rules and a source of dogma, rather that an encounter with the Living God. It becomes an object of worship rather than a revelation of the One we worship.
What is truth? It is Jesus, who continues to reveal the ways and working of God, and who through the Spirit guides us into fullness of life.
Mark 15:6-15
"So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released Barabbas to them; and after flogging Jesus, he handed him over to be crucified." Mark 15:15
Never ask a question that you do not know the answer for! Not good advice if you are a learner, but certainly good advice if you want to get your way.
Pilate is portrayed as a rather weak leader in these verses. AS Roman Procurator of Judea he was the supreme ruler, answerable only to Rome, and that w as a long way off.
Pilate ruled Judea for about ten years (27-37 CE) and was not known for recognizing the sensitivities of the Jews. The gospel accounts are far more sympathetic to Pilate tan other early writings of his activities and character.
Mark's account of Jesus before Pilate is the simplest. Having been presented with so many charges that were not denied or defended by Jesus Pilate appears to have accepted that Jesus was to be crucified, even though he had not been persuaded of the truth of these accusations. With Jerusalem alive with pilgrims, and the fear of having to cope with a riot or major disturbance in the overcrowded religious centre, Pilate offered to release Jesus to the crowd. His custom at Passover was to release one prisoner, and in his mind Jesus would be the one. His plan did not succeed, for he had not reckoned on the scheming of the chief priests or the fickleness of the crowd.
They rejected the one Pilate called "King of the Jews' and cried for Barabbas instead. They opted to set Barabbas free, and cried 'Crucify him' when Pilate asked what he should do with Jesus,
For Pilate this seems to have been an unexpected reaction. For the disciples and followers of Jesus this was yet another blow to any hopes that were left. He had 'come to his own, but his own received him not' (John 1:11)
How does one begin to understand the change in crowd opinion? From triumphal entry to total rejection in less that a week! Was it just a success propaganda campaign by the chief priests? Was it unfortunate timing for Jesus? Was it that his disciples and followers had fled and were not longer on the scene, or were they there and simply politically naïve?
However it came about Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified. The masses had won out, and the only satisfactory explanation for the gospel writers was the manipulation of the crowd by the chief priests. The opponent of Jesus were well organised, The followers of Jesus had lost their leader, and were not prepared or equipped to organize against the religious establishment. Despite what may have been the desires of the majority - a well-organised and well-connected elite had their way. It has long been so, and a populist movement standing up for the right takes a long time to gain support and generate enough momentum to topple the established powers.
Jesus was swept into Jerusalem on a wave of emotion (Mk 11:1-11) and just as quickly cast aside as the crowd cried out for Barabbas.
Mark 15:16-20
"They stuck his head with a reed, spat upon him, and knelt down in homage to him." Mark 15:19
When he was before the Council Jesus was blindfolded, stuck and spat upon (14:63). There the guards also had a turn to beat him. Even though Pilate found nothing wrong in what Jesus had done, he still had Jesus flogged (15:15). Then the soldiers led him into the courtyard of the governor's palace, and the whole cohort came to offer abuse. It seems he was not beaten again - but the purple robe and the crown of thorns were used as objects of derision and ridicule. The soldiers, some of them at least, mockingly knelt before this 'King' and others spat upon him. Jesus became their sport for that morning.
Why is it that the victors need to humiliate the vanquished? In Iraq stories of captives being shamed by their captors at least resulted in charges being laid and the abusers punished.
Why is it that we are not able to offer dignity and respect to those who are different from us, whose views we reject, when they area after all flesh and blood like us, with thoughts and feelings, hopes and dreams? It seems that for so many, whether they be Jewish or Roman leaders or just people like us, there is a need to exercise power over others to make ourselves feel good, important powerful be demeaning others,
Jesus was silent before his accusers, and submitted to the abuse handed out by those whose power was only a minute fraction of his own. Walking the way of Jesus is hard, especially when you become the abused. Even so we are called to follow him, even if it means death on a Cross.
Mark 15:21-32
In the same way the chief priests, along with the scribes were also mocking him among themselves and saying, 'He saved others; he cannot save himself. Let the Messiah the King of Israel, come down from the cross now so that we may see and believe.' Those who were crucified with him also taunted him." (Mark 15:31-32)
It was less than three hours from the first morning consultation of the council (15:1) until the crucifixion. Whatever the official system required was concluded with unseemly haste, Even the general public had been involved in that time.
The Jesus carried the cross to Golgotha, the place of the skull, but along the way he had a little help from Simon of Cyrene. There outside the city Jesus was crucified.
Mark offers no detail, no elaboration. It was for him a matter of fact. The little detail about Simon of Cyrene was no doubt added only because of a connection with Mark's community.
Jesus rejected the wine mixed with myrrh, his clothes were given away as the prize in a game of chance, and he was crucified. It was matter-of-fact stuff!
The response of those around him was more important.
The inscription above Jesus referred to him as "The King of the Jews". Pilate would have liked this touch as it annoyed the chief priests and members of the council, and showed the Roman superiority over their 'king'. The Roman soldiers would have enjoyed the slur on the natives as well. It was a little joke, mocking both Jesus and the Jews.
Those who came to watch picked up on the theme, and made fun of his predictions. The chief priests and scribes added their words of derision, and invited Jesus to save himself and come down from the cross. Mark notes that even the bandits alongside him, strung up on crosses of their own, also taunted him.
Could Jesus have come down from the cross? If he was the Son of God, co-equal in power and glory with God, the answer must be yes. It was possible for Jesus to save himself. Another miracle could have been added to the long list that Jesus had performed. His powers were able to command the forces of nature - surely it would only be a small matter to free himself from the cross. It was such a physical demonstration that the crowd called for. That was the salvation they had in mind.
Yet such an act would achieve nothing. It was the power of death that had to be confronted and defeated. Since sin had come into the world death had been an ever-present reality. The rules of this life were that the span of a person's life extended from birth to death. Few had glimpsed anything beyond, yet all hoped and prayed and worked and appeased the gods in the hope of something more.
To come down from the cross would demonstrate Jesus power over this world. He had to die to reveal the true extent of his power - and the power of God - that extended beyond the physical realm and beyond the boundaries of time. Save himself? He could, and yet to truly reveal the power of God, he could not!
Mark 15:33-41
"And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. (Mark 15:38)
Three hours! After the beatings and the abuse Jesus was stretched upon the cross for three hours. It does not seem like a long time, unless you area the one who is suffering, or if you are watching and wishing that the pain would end. Then, even five minutes seems like an eternity.
Days and hours or usually of little consequence to Mark, but the passion narrative, especially the day of the crucifixion, contains specific time markers - the cock crow, nine o'clock (the third hour), noon (the sixth hour), three o'clock (the ninth hour) and evening. For Jesus followers these hours must have passed agonizingly slowly as they saw their Master hanging in pain and being taunted and mocked by the crowd.
"And darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon." (15:33)
Was this a natural phenomenon? Passover is at the time of a full moon - so it was unlikely to be an eclipse. A 'breaking in' of God marked all the birth of Jesus, his baptism, and the transfiguration. Here Jesus death is also marked by an event of cosmic significance. This time it is the absence of light. Was it a divine breaking in? Did the darkness hide the agony of the one who is the light of the world?
We struggle to comprehend such an upheaval in the natural order of things. To say it is just a metaphor is to deny the power of God over the natural and physical world. Darkness at noon, and for three hours, cannot be dismissed as a mere metaphor, yet the imagery itself should not be dismissed. Jesus, the light of the world, strung upon that cross. The flame of his life was being extinguished by a Roman instrument of torture and punishment at the instigation of the Jewish leaders. The hopes and dreams of his followers were being dashed. It was indeed a time of darkness.
The darkness ended when Jesus 'breathed his last". "And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom". (15:38)
The centurion recognised the unique nature of Jesus, and while we read the phrase unambiguously the Greek and the usage of terms is not so clear. The blessing of God was on Jesus, Jesus was a child of God - that w as clear- but was Jesus truly God? That is not clear from the centurion's statement.
It is in hindsight that the story was told, it was in hindsight that Mark wrote, but the events happened 'in real time'. Those who watched on grappled with all that was taking place. For them it was the agony of the moment. Bringing meaning to what had taking place was an activity for later.
We, too, need to grapple with these events and seek to understand their significance for ourselves, and for our communities.
As this section concludes Mark points to a forgotten group - the women who would follow Jesus and provide for him. There were more to be numbered among Jesus' company than just the Twelve, and his followers included many women whose support went mostly unrecognised in the patriarchal society and by writers immersed in that culture. Mark now points to their presence, and to their influence.
Mark 15:42-47
"Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus." Mark 15:43
It was the day before the Sabbath, and whatever needed to be done needed to be done quickly. From an unexpected source, the council itself, came one who seems to have either avoided entering the conflict or been changed by the events of the day.
We want to see in Joseph a sympathizer, or even perhaps a believer. What other reason might he have for asking for the body of Jesus, and placing it in a new tomb!
Perhaps the unseemly haste, and lack of damning evidence had left him uncomfortable about the judgment and the penalty that followed. Somehow this action might make amends or at least appease his conscience.
Perhaps the events of the day, the peace of Jesus in the face of such suffering and the darkness at noon, had convinced him that Jesus was no ordinary man. As such he deserved a proper burial, and this decent man wanted to make sure the he got it.
Perhpas he had become convinced of the truth of Jesus teaching, and became a secret follower.
We cannot know. But Joseph stepped out of the crowd, and stood up against the prevailing view of the chief priests, and acted as a friend would. He braved the court of Pilate, and probable antagonism of the council, and did what was right. It was a courageous act, with consequences Joseph could not foresee.
Joseph was waiting expectantly for the kingdom that Jesus had preached, taught about and lived. The time had come, and he aligned himself with the crucified Jesus.
There was courage in his action. We can never know where support will come if our cause is just
"Pilate asked him 'Are you the king of the Jews?' He answered him, 'You say so'" Mark 15:2
The gospel accounts agree on the substance. Jesus was taken before Pilate. While the details may vary it is still God's story, revealed through faithful servants whom the Spirit has inspired to communicate the Truth - and to show us Jesus and the way God has graciously dealt with all of creation since the beginning of time.
Following a brief consultation with the whole council or Sanhedrin Jesus was taken before Pilate. This was to bring the weight of the civil authorities down upon Jesus, for without Pilate's approval there could be no capital punishment
From Mark's sources the incident is brief. Pilate's question about Jesus kingship brings no answer that would condemn Jesus, and the accusations of the chief priests were given no response, Jesus remained silent in the face of his accusers.
John's gospel offers a much fuller account - even a philosophical discussion that would have been appropriate for the Greek mind. The oft quoted line "What is truth?" comes from John's gospel. For the followers of Jesus that question is answered simply by the words of Jesus that prompted that question "Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice."
For John is was truth that was at issue. For Mark that particular dynamic is missing from the words in this part of the narrative, yet is still hidden beneath them. His accusers could not obtain valid testimony against him (14:56), even though they continued to pour forth their accusations (15:3). From Pilate there is no guilty verdict - but Jesus was not set free. Truth became the victim of expediency.
So it is at times with the Word of God. Often the words are lifted out of their context and made into something they are not. The Word becomes a weapon to wield against others. It is no longer a light to guide or a medicine to bring healing to people and relationships. It becomes a means of control rather than a source of liberation. It becomes an immutable and unchangeable set of rules and a source of dogma, rather that an encounter with the Living God. It becomes an object of worship rather than a revelation of the One we worship.
What is truth? It is Jesus, who continues to reveal the ways and working of God, and who through the Spirit guides us into fullness of life.
Mark 15:6-15
"So Pilate, wishing to satisfy the crowd, released Barabbas to them; and after flogging Jesus, he handed him over to be crucified." Mark 15:15
Never ask a question that you do not know the answer for! Not good advice if you are a learner, but certainly good advice if you want to get your way.
Pilate is portrayed as a rather weak leader in these verses. AS Roman Procurator of Judea he was the supreme ruler, answerable only to Rome, and that w as a long way off.
Pilate ruled Judea for about ten years (27-37 CE) and was not known for recognizing the sensitivities of the Jews. The gospel accounts are far more sympathetic to Pilate tan other early writings of his activities and character.
Mark's account of Jesus before Pilate is the simplest. Having been presented with so many charges that were not denied or defended by Jesus Pilate appears to have accepted that Jesus was to be crucified, even though he had not been persuaded of the truth of these accusations. With Jerusalem alive with pilgrims, and the fear of having to cope with a riot or major disturbance in the overcrowded religious centre, Pilate offered to release Jesus to the crowd. His custom at Passover was to release one prisoner, and in his mind Jesus would be the one. His plan did not succeed, for he had not reckoned on the scheming of the chief priests or the fickleness of the crowd.
They rejected the one Pilate called "King of the Jews' and cried for Barabbas instead. They opted to set Barabbas free, and cried 'Crucify him' when Pilate asked what he should do with Jesus,
For Pilate this seems to have been an unexpected reaction. For the disciples and followers of Jesus this was yet another blow to any hopes that were left. He had 'come to his own, but his own received him not' (John 1:11)
How does one begin to understand the change in crowd opinion? From triumphal entry to total rejection in less that a week! Was it just a success propaganda campaign by the chief priests? Was it unfortunate timing for Jesus? Was it that his disciples and followers had fled and were not longer on the scene, or were they there and simply politically naïve?
However it came about Pilate handed Jesus over to be crucified. The masses had won out, and the only satisfactory explanation for the gospel writers was the manipulation of the crowd by the chief priests. The opponent of Jesus were well organised, The followers of Jesus had lost their leader, and were not prepared or equipped to organize against the religious establishment. Despite what may have been the desires of the majority - a well-organised and well-connected elite had their way. It has long been so, and a populist movement standing up for the right takes a long time to gain support and generate enough momentum to topple the established powers.
Jesus was swept into Jerusalem on a wave of emotion (Mk 11:1-11) and just as quickly cast aside as the crowd cried out for Barabbas.
Mark 15:16-20
"They stuck his head with a reed, spat upon him, and knelt down in homage to him." Mark 15:19
When he was before the Council Jesus was blindfolded, stuck and spat upon (14:63). There the guards also had a turn to beat him. Even though Pilate found nothing wrong in what Jesus had done, he still had Jesus flogged (15:15). Then the soldiers led him into the courtyard of the governor's palace, and the whole cohort came to offer abuse. It seems he was not beaten again - but the purple robe and the crown of thorns were used as objects of derision and ridicule. The soldiers, some of them at least, mockingly knelt before this 'King' and others spat upon him. Jesus became their sport for that morning.
Why is it that the victors need to humiliate the vanquished? In Iraq stories of captives being shamed by their captors at least resulted in charges being laid and the abusers punished.
Why is it that we are not able to offer dignity and respect to those who are different from us, whose views we reject, when they area after all flesh and blood like us, with thoughts and feelings, hopes and dreams? It seems that for so many, whether they be Jewish or Roman leaders or just people like us, there is a need to exercise power over others to make ourselves feel good, important powerful be demeaning others,
Jesus was silent before his accusers, and submitted to the abuse handed out by those whose power was only a minute fraction of his own. Walking the way of Jesus is hard, especially when you become the abused. Even so we are called to follow him, even if it means death on a Cross.
Mark 15:21-32
In the same way the chief priests, along with the scribes were also mocking him among themselves and saying, 'He saved others; he cannot save himself. Let the Messiah the King of Israel, come down from the cross now so that we may see and believe.' Those who were crucified with him also taunted him." (Mark 15:31-32)
It was less than three hours from the first morning consultation of the council (15:1) until the crucifixion. Whatever the official system required was concluded with unseemly haste, Even the general public had been involved in that time.
The Jesus carried the cross to Golgotha, the place of the skull, but along the way he had a little help from Simon of Cyrene. There outside the city Jesus was crucified.
Mark offers no detail, no elaboration. It was for him a matter of fact. The little detail about Simon of Cyrene was no doubt added only because of a connection with Mark's community.
Jesus rejected the wine mixed with myrrh, his clothes were given away as the prize in a game of chance, and he was crucified. It was matter-of-fact stuff!
The response of those around him was more important.
The inscription above Jesus referred to him as "The King of the Jews". Pilate would have liked this touch as it annoyed the chief priests and members of the council, and showed the Roman superiority over their 'king'. The Roman soldiers would have enjoyed the slur on the natives as well. It was a little joke, mocking both Jesus and the Jews.
Those who came to watch picked up on the theme, and made fun of his predictions. The chief priests and scribes added their words of derision, and invited Jesus to save himself and come down from the cross. Mark notes that even the bandits alongside him, strung up on crosses of their own, also taunted him.
Could Jesus have come down from the cross? If he was the Son of God, co-equal in power and glory with God, the answer must be yes. It was possible for Jesus to save himself. Another miracle could have been added to the long list that Jesus had performed. His powers were able to command the forces of nature - surely it would only be a small matter to free himself from the cross. It was such a physical demonstration that the crowd called for. That was the salvation they had in mind.
Yet such an act would achieve nothing. It was the power of death that had to be confronted and defeated. Since sin had come into the world death had been an ever-present reality. The rules of this life were that the span of a person's life extended from birth to death. Few had glimpsed anything beyond, yet all hoped and prayed and worked and appeased the gods in the hope of something more.
To come down from the cross would demonstrate Jesus power over this world. He had to die to reveal the true extent of his power - and the power of God - that extended beyond the physical realm and beyond the boundaries of time. Save himself? He could, and yet to truly reveal the power of God, he could not!
Mark 15:33-41
"And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom. (Mark 15:38)
Three hours! After the beatings and the abuse Jesus was stretched upon the cross for three hours. It does not seem like a long time, unless you area the one who is suffering, or if you are watching and wishing that the pain would end. Then, even five minutes seems like an eternity.
Days and hours or usually of little consequence to Mark, but the passion narrative, especially the day of the crucifixion, contains specific time markers - the cock crow, nine o'clock (the third hour), noon (the sixth hour), three o'clock (the ninth hour) and evening. For Jesus followers these hours must have passed agonizingly slowly as they saw their Master hanging in pain and being taunted and mocked by the crowd.
"And darkness came over the whole land until three in the afternoon." (15:33)
Was this a natural phenomenon? Passover is at the time of a full moon - so it was unlikely to be an eclipse. A 'breaking in' of God marked all the birth of Jesus, his baptism, and the transfiguration. Here Jesus death is also marked by an event of cosmic significance. This time it is the absence of light. Was it a divine breaking in? Did the darkness hide the agony of the one who is the light of the world?
We struggle to comprehend such an upheaval in the natural order of things. To say it is just a metaphor is to deny the power of God over the natural and physical world. Darkness at noon, and for three hours, cannot be dismissed as a mere metaphor, yet the imagery itself should not be dismissed. Jesus, the light of the world, strung upon that cross. The flame of his life was being extinguished by a Roman instrument of torture and punishment at the instigation of the Jewish leaders. The hopes and dreams of his followers were being dashed. It was indeed a time of darkness.
The darkness ended when Jesus 'breathed his last". "And the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom". (15:38)
The centurion recognised the unique nature of Jesus, and while we read the phrase unambiguously the Greek and the usage of terms is not so clear. The blessing of God was on Jesus, Jesus was a child of God - that w as clear- but was Jesus truly God? That is not clear from the centurion's statement.
It is in hindsight that the story was told, it was in hindsight that Mark wrote, but the events happened 'in real time'. Those who watched on grappled with all that was taking place. For them it was the agony of the moment. Bringing meaning to what had taking place was an activity for later.
We, too, need to grapple with these events and seek to understand their significance for ourselves, and for our communities.
As this section concludes Mark points to a forgotten group - the women who would follow Jesus and provide for him. There were more to be numbered among Jesus' company than just the Twelve, and his followers included many women whose support went mostly unrecognised in the patriarchal society and by writers immersed in that culture. Mark now points to their presence, and to their influence.
Mark 15:42-47
"Joseph of Arimathea, a respected member of the council, who was also waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God, went boldly to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus." Mark 15:43
It was the day before the Sabbath, and whatever needed to be done needed to be done quickly. From an unexpected source, the council itself, came one who seems to have either avoided entering the conflict or been changed by the events of the day.
We want to see in Joseph a sympathizer, or even perhaps a believer. What other reason might he have for asking for the body of Jesus, and placing it in a new tomb!
Perhaps the unseemly haste, and lack of damning evidence had left him uncomfortable about the judgment and the penalty that followed. Somehow this action might make amends or at least appease his conscience.
Perhaps the events of the day, the peace of Jesus in the face of such suffering and the darkness at noon, had convinced him that Jesus was no ordinary man. As such he deserved a proper burial, and this decent man wanted to make sure the he got it.
Perhpas he had become convinced of the truth of Jesus teaching, and became a secret follower.
We cannot know. But Joseph stepped out of the crowd, and stood up against the prevailing view of the chief priests, and acted as a friend would. He braved the court of Pilate, and probable antagonism of the council, and did what was right. It was a courageous act, with consequences Joseph could not foresee.
Joseph was waiting expectantly for the kingdom that Jesus had preached, taught about and lived. The time had come, and he aligned himself with the crucified Jesus.
There was courage in his action. We can never know where support will come if our cause is just
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Liturgy of the Passion - 2
Mark 14:32-42
'I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and keep awake'. And going a little further he threw himself on the ground and prayed." Mark 14:34
They slept.
After a long day and the Passover celebrations they had shared with the other disciples Peter, James and John went with Jesus to Gethsemane. Jesus told them of his grief. The NIV translates it as 'deeply grieved' The Greek means 'very sad' or 'deeply distressed'. It seems that the English cannot express this phrase easily. To the very depths of his being Jesus was experiencing grief.
That which he faced is almost unimaginable to us. The physical suffering was depicted in Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ', but as hard as it was to watch the violence we were still observers. Few know what that level of pain feels like, and we cannot really know how much that impacts on the very core of our being. Pain and grief can be shared; and we can try to understand and empathize. But pain and grief are also very personal. Only the one who is suffering can really know. Whatever Jesus said to his disciples was not enough to allow them to carry his grief or enter into his distress. It is just not possible. They were observers, and always would be.
The disciples were tired, and could not keep awake as Jesus prayed. Would we have done anything else? I doubt it. Would anything have changed if they had remained awake? I doubt it. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak (14:36).
And so we continue to try to understand others, to stand with them in their pain and suffering - but the flesh is weak, We must to our best to support others in tie of trial and hardship - and be careful not to judge others (who may sleep while we suffer) too harshly. Others do not truly know the burdens we carry, nor understand how they affect us. Nor can we truly understand the experiences of others.
Like Jesus, the time must come for all of us to pick up our burden and get going (Mk 14:42) to face whatever is in store.
Mark 14:43-51
"The one I kiss us the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard,"
Jesus' days of freedom were drawing to a close. As the night had drawn on and darkness descended Judas entered the garden, together with "a crowd with swords and clubs from the chief priests scribes and the elders"(43). It was seem that this was not just a company of guards, but some guards and a number of others. Of the evangelists only John even mentions the police (John 18:3).
It was dark, even though the moon must have been full, but Jesus was well known to the chief priest and elders, why then was it necessary for Judas to specifically identify Jesus? Perhaps it was part of the agreement, or it was that they wished to be absolutely certain they got the right man. And so it was that Judas identified Jesus by his words (Rabbi) and by his actions,
From one of the disciples came a violent reaction- and the ear of the slave of the high priest was cut off. John records that Peter struck the bow (Jn 18:10), and identifies the slave by name, Malchus. Jesus healed the injured one.
Violence was rejected. Perhaps it was that act of violence, and the threat of reprisal, that caused his disciples to flee. Here we have an interesting yet totally irrelevant aside about a young man who was a follower of Jesus. He was almost caught, but escaped by leaving his cloak behind and running naked into the night. Many have speculated that it was Mark. It may be so, or it may simply be one who was present. In the dark times there may still be things that cause us to smile, afterwards anyway, even if not at the time.
Jesus acceptance of what took place, his lack of resistance or even antagonism is amazing. He had accepted that there was no other way, and was prepared to walk the difficult path to the cross. It was not resignation to what had to happen - it was the embrace of the will of God, Hard though it may have been he was free to move forward without inner resistance, and the peace of heart and mind was evident in his responses to his own followers, as well as to those who opposed him.
Mark 14:53-65
Now the chief priests and the whole council were looking for testimony against Jesus to put him to death; but they found none." Mark 14:55
The scene of the drama moves to the place of the High Priest, Matthew names the high priest as Caiaphas, in whose house this hearing took place. Luke gives us a time - early in the morning 'when day came'. Peter, we learn, was nearby in the courtyard, He was too far removed to witness the events, but close enough to hear from the soldiers and the servants what was taking place.
For the religious authorities there were two forces at work. Both were connected to their ability to hang on to power.
Popular support was with Jesus, for his teaching was different to that f the scribes and Pharisees. Although based on the same foundations his focus was on living out the principles of the law. The scribes and Pharisees emphasised obedience in the detail of the law. Jesus aimed at the inner being - and having the inner orientation correct. The outer world would follow. The lawmakers and religious power brokers were about getting the behaviours correct and obeying the rules and regulations that had made the Jews a distinct people. In that way they would conform to the plan of God, even if the heart was untouched. Jesus was challenging their power and influence among the people.
The other force at work was related to political power - for the popular acclaim made the Roman overlords nervous. They had entrusted civil order to the local authorities, and if there were a civil uprising in Jerusalem the Roman governor would not hesitate to use force. If that happened the political power and influence of the chief priests might be lost. Jesus was the cause of that threat- and the threat had to be removed.
False testimony did not work - their testimonies did not agree, and Jesus' words left room for different interpretation. His own teaching was cited - but was not enough for them to act. Jesus was invited to respond to the testimony against him - but gave no response.
It took a direct question from the high priest, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?" before Jesus responded. His positive response, and prediction of his place at the right hand of God, was enough to provoke outrage and condemnation. His fate was sealed. It seems that almost immediately the physical abuse began. Jesus was spat upon, struck and mocked.
Just recently the Anglicans and Atheist Foundation in Australia lobbied to have the offence of blasphemy removed from the legal statutes. The atheists see it as an anathema. Since they do not believe God exists it is impossible to blaspheme. The Anglicans believe that God is well equipped in the area of self-defence, and does not rely upon us for defence. I have no doubt that the power of God is ultimately unassailable - and it is his people who need to give witness to that power. It is not for us to exercise the power of God via the law, but for us to allow the power of God to work in us and through us.
And so Jesus took his stance, and did not use his power as Son of God to defend himself, He allowed the power of God to bring the triumph in God's time. How often do we feel compelled to justify our actions and use our position or resources to prove our 'rightness'? The example and approach of Jesus challenges us.
Mark 14:66-72
"Then Peter remembered that Jesus had said to him, 'Before the cock crows twice you will deny me three times'. And he broke down and wept." Mark 14:72
At the same time that Jesus had revealed his betrayal he also predicted Peter's denial. Call it prophecy or prediction it matters not! Jesus told Peter, the bravest, most outspoken and most impetuous of the disciples that he would deny even knowing Jesus, not just once but three times, all before the cock crowed twice.
In effect Jesus told one who loved him dearly, who had left home and work to follow him for three years, that within the next ten hours he would deny knowing Jesus at all.Peter was upset, and probably hurt by that statement. Yet when the cock crowed a second time Jesus words were remembered.
Mark's little courtyard scene involves Peter, a servant girl, some bystanders, and (somewhere off stage) a rooster. Peter was close enough to the action to hear the talk of the servants, and was able to warm himself by the fire on a cold night. The flickering flames played on his face, and an unnamed servant girl had a flash of recognition. She asked if he had been with Jesus, but Peter denied it. He moved away from the fire and a little distance into the forecourt. Cockcrow number one was heard.
The girl pursued Peter and let others know she saw him with Jesus. Denial number two followed. Others chime in and comment on his homeland, Galilee, which was revealed by his accent. Coming from Galilee linked him with Jesus. 'Surely you are one of them' they said. Peter denied it and declares strongly, on oath, that he has nothing to do with Jesus, The hammer blow falls as the cock crows a second time.Five minutes perhaps, and in that time Jesus has denied three times that he knows Jesus.
Our denials may not happen so quickly or so easily, but they happen. If we fail to give witness to Jesus as Lord and Saviour, if we fail to live up to what we know is right, if we allow other teaching to shape or lives, we disconnect from Jesus. Yet for us there is no cockcrow to move us to penitence. The questions will not be as blatant, and the pressure may be less intense, but we are all subject to subtle pressure to deny our allegiance to Jesus.
When we that happens we must remember the reaction of Peter, and allow our tears to reveal our penitence.
'I am deeply grieved, even to death; remain here, and keep awake'. And going a little further he threw himself on the ground and prayed." Mark 14:34
They slept.
After a long day and the Passover celebrations they had shared with the other disciples Peter, James and John went with Jesus to Gethsemane. Jesus told them of his grief. The NIV translates it as 'deeply grieved' The Greek means 'very sad' or 'deeply distressed'. It seems that the English cannot express this phrase easily. To the very depths of his being Jesus was experiencing grief.
That which he faced is almost unimaginable to us. The physical suffering was depicted in Mel Gibson's movie "The Passion of the Christ', but as hard as it was to watch the violence we were still observers. Few know what that level of pain feels like, and we cannot really know how much that impacts on the very core of our being. Pain and grief can be shared; and we can try to understand and empathize. But pain and grief are also very personal. Only the one who is suffering can really know. Whatever Jesus said to his disciples was not enough to allow them to carry his grief or enter into his distress. It is just not possible. They were observers, and always would be.
The disciples were tired, and could not keep awake as Jesus prayed. Would we have done anything else? I doubt it. Would anything have changed if they had remained awake? I doubt it. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak (14:36).
And so we continue to try to understand others, to stand with them in their pain and suffering - but the flesh is weak, We must to our best to support others in tie of trial and hardship - and be careful not to judge others (who may sleep while we suffer) too harshly. Others do not truly know the burdens we carry, nor understand how they affect us. Nor can we truly understand the experiences of others.
Like Jesus, the time must come for all of us to pick up our burden and get going (Mk 14:42) to face whatever is in store.
Mark 14:43-51
"The one I kiss us the man; arrest him and lead him away under guard,"
Jesus' days of freedom were drawing to a close. As the night had drawn on and darkness descended Judas entered the garden, together with "a crowd with swords and clubs from the chief priests scribes and the elders"(43). It was seem that this was not just a company of guards, but some guards and a number of others. Of the evangelists only John even mentions the police (John 18:3).
It was dark, even though the moon must have been full, but Jesus was well known to the chief priest and elders, why then was it necessary for Judas to specifically identify Jesus? Perhaps it was part of the agreement, or it was that they wished to be absolutely certain they got the right man. And so it was that Judas identified Jesus by his words (Rabbi) and by his actions,
From one of the disciples came a violent reaction- and the ear of the slave of the high priest was cut off. John records that Peter struck the bow (Jn 18:10), and identifies the slave by name, Malchus. Jesus healed the injured one.
Violence was rejected. Perhaps it was that act of violence, and the threat of reprisal, that caused his disciples to flee. Here we have an interesting yet totally irrelevant aside about a young man who was a follower of Jesus. He was almost caught, but escaped by leaving his cloak behind and running naked into the night. Many have speculated that it was Mark. It may be so, or it may simply be one who was present. In the dark times there may still be things that cause us to smile, afterwards anyway, even if not at the time.
Jesus acceptance of what took place, his lack of resistance or even antagonism is amazing. He had accepted that there was no other way, and was prepared to walk the difficult path to the cross. It was not resignation to what had to happen - it was the embrace of the will of God, Hard though it may have been he was free to move forward without inner resistance, and the peace of heart and mind was evident in his responses to his own followers, as well as to those who opposed him.
Mark 14:53-65
Now the chief priests and the whole council were looking for testimony against Jesus to put him to death; but they found none." Mark 14:55
The scene of the drama moves to the place of the High Priest, Matthew names the high priest as Caiaphas, in whose house this hearing took place. Luke gives us a time - early in the morning 'when day came'. Peter, we learn, was nearby in the courtyard, He was too far removed to witness the events, but close enough to hear from the soldiers and the servants what was taking place.
For the religious authorities there were two forces at work. Both were connected to their ability to hang on to power.
Popular support was with Jesus, for his teaching was different to that f the scribes and Pharisees. Although based on the same foundations his focus was on living out the principles of the law. The scribes and Pharisees emphasised obedience in the detail of the law. Jesus aimed at the inner being - and having the inner orientation correct. The outer world would follow. The lawmakers and religious power brokers were about getting the behaviours correct and obeying the rules and regulations that had made the Jews a distinct people. In that way they would conform to the plan of God, even if the heart was untouched. Jesus was challenging their power and influence among the people.
The other force at work was related to political power - for the popular acclaim made the Roman overlords nervous. They had entrusted civil order to the local authorities, and if there were a civil uprising in Jerusalem the Roman governor would not hesitate to use force. If that happened the political power and influence of the chief priests might be lost. Jesus was the cause of that threat- and the threat had to be removed.
False testimony did not work - their testimonies did not agree, and Jesus' words left room for different interpretation. His own teaching was cited - but was not enough for them to act. Jesus was invited to respond to the testimony against him - but gave no response.
It took a direct question from the high priest, "Are you the Messiah, the Son of the Blessed One?" before Jesus responded. His positive response, and prediction of his place at the right hand of God, was enough to provoke outrage and condemnation. His fate was sealed. It seems that almost immediately the physical abuse began. Jesus was spat upon, struck and mocked.
Just recently the Anglicans and Atheist Foundation in Australia lobbied to have the offence of blasphemy removed from the legal statutes. The atheists see it as an anathema. Since they do not believe God exists it is impossible to blaspheme. The Anglicans believe that God is well equipped in the area of self-defence, and does not rely upon us for defence. I have no doubt that the power of God is ultimately unassailable - and it is his people who need to give witness to that power. It is not for us to exercise the power of God via the law, but for us to allow the power of God to work in us and through us.
And so Jesus took his stance, and did not use his power as Son of God to defend himself, He allowed the power of God to bring the triumph in God's time. How often do we feel compelled to justify our actions and use our position or resources to prove our 'rightness'? The example and approach of Jesus challenges us.
Mark 14:66-72
"Then Peter remembered that Jesus had said to him, 'Before the cock crows twice you will deny me three times'. And he broke down and wept." Mark 14:72
At the same time that Jesus had revealed his betrayal he also predicted Peter's denial. Call it prophecy or prediction it matters not! Jesus told Peter, the bravest, most outspoken and most impetuous of the disciples that he would deny even knowing Jesus, not just once but three times, all before the cock crowed twice.
In effect Jesus told one who loved him dearly, who had left home and work to follow him for three years, that within the next ten hours he would deny knowing Jesus at all.Peter was upset, and probably hurt by that statement. Yet when the cock crowed a second time Jesus words were remembered.
Mark's little courtyard scene involves Peter, a servant girl, some bystanders, and (somewhere off stage) a rooster. Peter was close enough to the action to hear the talk of the servants, and was able to warm himself by the fire on a cold night. The flickering flames played on his face, and an unnamed servant girl had a flash of recognition. She asked if he had been with Jesus, but Peter denied it. He moved away from the fire and a little distance into the forecourt. Cockcrow number one was heard.
The girl pursued Peter and let others know she saw him with Jesus. Denial number two followed. Others chime in and comment on his homeland, Galilee, which was revealed by his accent. Coming from Galilee linked him with Jesus. 'Surely you are one of them' they said. Peter denied it and declares strongly, on oath, that he has nothing to do with Jesus, The hammer blow falls as the cock crows a second time.Five minutes perhaps, and in that time Jesus has denied three times that he knows Jesus.
Our denials may not happen so quickly or so easily, but they happen. If we fail to give witness to Jesus as Lord and Saviour, if we fail to live up to what we know is right, if we allow other teaching to shape or lives, we disconnect from Jesus. Yet for us there is no cockcrow to move us to penitence. The questions will not be as blatant, and the pressure may be less intense, but we are all subject to subtle pressure to deny our allegiance to Jesus.
When we that happens we must remember the reaction of Peter, and allow our tears to reveal our penitence.
Litrugy of the Passon 1
Mark 14:1-15:57
Mark 14:1-2
"...they said 'Not during the festival or there may be a riot among the people'".
Mark 14:2
The Passion narrative is a complete unit of tradition - unlike much of what has preceded it. Three gospels record events almost in the same sequence, while John's variation is a focus on Jesus words and prayers, and is much more reflective. The Passion Narrative is a sustained unit of tradition - yet custom has the church dealing with the various scenes in this story over five days. More time is needed to consider the various aspects.
We begin this reading with the immediate introduction of tension - the plot to kill Jesus. Time is set (two days before the Passover), and intention declared, but there is a restricting factor to the plan of the Jewish religious leaders - the popularity of Jesus.
The sheer number of people in Jerusalem for the Passover, and the general level of support for Jesus - made Jesus' opponents wary. The Passover was not the time. A riot was feared. But it did not work out according to their initial ideas. God had other plans - and while the chief priests and scribes may have 'taken advantage' of opportunities presented and so achieved their ends - it was not their schedule that was run. What God plans and what we plan may coincide, but when they do not we need to look to God's timing - it will always win out.
Our plans for 2008 had long been a sabbatical year. In 2009 we finally got to take that time out, just 12 months delayed. For reasons related to work alone we knew early in 2007, perhaps even earlier in 2006, that 2008 would not be the year. As things unfolded during the year they revealed just how right the actual timing, God's timing, was. As 2009 unfolds for us that has been confirmed again.
The chief priests and scribes had their idea about when things should happen. God had other ideas.
Mark 14:3-9
"For you shall always have the poor with you, and you can show kindness to them whenever you wish; but you will not always have me." Mark 14:3-9
At the house of Simon the leper - or Simon the former leper (if he really was a leper they would not have gone near his house) - Jesus and his disciples were sharing a meal. This incident is recorded in all four gospels, and Mark's version of this event is in a somewhat unusually identified location.
The gospels vary in small (and sometimes important) details. Mark (with Matthew) has an alabaster jar, the anointing of Jesus' head, and identifies the unnamed woman's action as preparation for burial.
Differences between accounts need not concern us unduly, unless we want every word in Scripture to be the literal historic truth. An event occurred, and like any witnesses or participants three of four different versions of the incident vary in their details. There is also the possibility that one of the four 'anointings' was a completely separate incident. It would be unusual if eyewitnesses all saw and heard the same thing, and responded to it in exactly the same way. That would suggest one witness, whose story became the 'authorised version', rather than four witnesses sharing their story and their perspective.
In three of the accounts the reaction of the onlookers focuses on the waste of resources, almost a year's wages for a labourer have been tipped over Jesus' head. Such an extravagant act is an act of great love and devotion.
To the onlookers concerned about money (and I would have been among them) Jesus pointed to the universal presence of the poor - and his very temporary stay. Her act of devotion was graciously accepted.
What do we do now to show the depth of our love and devotion? Jesus isn't around for us to give him extravagant gifts - and the poor remain, they are always with us.
In Matthew 25:31-36 we read Jesus' parable of the sheep and the goats. We learn that if we care for or minister to the sick, hungry or poor we are, as it were, pouring oil on Jesus' head.
As I write this in Tanzania, one of the poorest countries in the world, there are orphans on the street, even though I cannot identify them. There are a few beggars, mainly older ladies, who occasionally approach for a few shillings. There are families who struggle to put food on the table and to pay for clothing. They are around me, and I am not yet able to see or know who they are and what their struggle. There are many who strive for an education, a chance to get a regular job, and the possibility of a brighter future, The poor cannot afford to pay the fees for secondary school, let alone a tertiary education for the brightest among them. The poor we will always have with us.
Our love for Jesus should cause us to reach for the oil, and choose where to pour it. As we offer our gifts we will be preparing others for life, Scripture tells us that it will be as though we are giving our gift to Jesus.
Mark 14:10-11
"Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them." Mark 14:10
This we do not understand!
The One who taught with authority, healed the sick, exorcised demons, crossed the boundaries of social and religious tradition and healed lepers, women and foreigners, and welcomed children into his presence, was betrayed by one of his followers. Why?
By placing Judas' visit to the chief priests after the anointing at Bethany the betrayal is linked to money. References to money in Mark 14:5 & 11 serve to make that connection as the passion narrative begins.
Mark writes that they 'promised' to give Judas money. Matthew makes this transaction explicit and identifies a payment of "30 pieces of silver" (Mt 26:15). In contrast, Luke makes no mention of this incident. He has shaped the anointing incident (Lk 7:36-50) to focus on forgiveness. It has no place in his passion narrative, and the first hint of betrayal comes at the Lord's Supper. (Lk 20:21-23). Judas is identified as the betrayer only in the garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:47). John shares this scenario with Luke, but has added an aside in his version of the anointing. In John, Judas is the one who asked about the waste of money, and with that question and the aside about future betrayal, Judas treachery is linked in our minds.
So the four gospels point to the finger at Judas as the mercenary betrayer. He sold Jesus for "30 pieces of silver".
Most people do not act out of singular motives. Helping the poor, for example, is a good thing to do. But id we are honest we would acknowledge that it also gives us a good feeling. For some it may also ease some guilt, or give them an interest in life beyond themselves, a project to invest in perhaps. At the same time it may even offer a tax break. And we must also remember that Scripture (Jewish and Christian) commands it. Motivation can include a number of different yet interrelated factors - it can be very complex.
So, too, Judas betrayal of Jesus. It may have been a money thing, but so many other aspects come into play. Was Judas disappointed with the 'other-worldly' emphasis of Jesus, whose kingdom was 'not of this world'? Was he a revolutionary at heart, who saw in Jesus one who would bring about the restoration of the nation of the Jews as in independent country? Was he longing for the restoration of the kingdom of David? Could it be that his traditional religious perspectives had been threatened as Jesus challenged the teachings of the chief priests, and the scribes? Could the increasing opposition to Jesus have caused Judas to be concerned about his own survival, and prompted him to protect himself?
Money is the easy answer...for it seems that we all believe that every person has his price. Thirty pieces of silver was a lot of money. Other motivating factors are not always obvious, nor are they always shared. For the gospel writer's money is the obvious connection. When looking at our own motivation we would do well to look past the obvious and explore honestly our innermost thoughts and feelings. Pure motives are great. The nature of our humanity, however, is that very few things we do come from a place of purity!
Mark 14:12-25
"This is my body... this is my blood." Mark 14:22,24
Timing is everything!
Jesus had already paved the way and prepared the place, Two disciples had to follow his instructions and then prepare for the Passover meal. For Jews this event was a part of the cult, a practice that reminded them of where they had come from, and who they were. It was a celebration of their past and an affirmation of their identity.
Jesus met with his disciples to celebrate. Normally this was a family event, and Jesus met with his 'new' family - the disciples.
Mark's account is simple and straightforward, and gives prediction of Jesus' betrayal equal space with the institution of the Lord's Supper. (Jesus ate with his betrayer, but Mark gives no further indication of who that betrayer would be. He was with them - so it was clearly one of the Twelve.) We note that in Mark's gospel it is a leader heading that suggests or implies the introduction of a new ritual. Mark told the story - later editors have imposed their understanding (or the understanding of their tradition) as most of our translations have section headings that were not part of the original text. Nothing Jesus had done up to now has pointed to a practice that should be repeated, and nothing in Mark's text around this event points that way either!
In the Passover celebration the breaking of bread and the drinking of wine carry particular significance. Jesus used these rituals, and renewed them, imbued them with new significance as he shared them with the Twelve. The bread that was broken was his body, the wine his blood -"the blood of the covenant poured out for many"(14:24)
How the disciples understood this at the time we do not know, Later the reality would hit home. It is no wonder they repeated this event, and later on it became 'an institution' and one of the sacraments of the Church.
Our remembrance of Jesus through the re-enactment of the Lord's Supper will help us to envisage the scene, experience the emotion, understand the pain, and embrace the cross.
For many followers of Jesus the practice of the Lord' Supper (the Eucharist or Holy Communion) defines who they are. It is part of their identity.
Participation in such a ritual does not make is Christians or followers of Jesus, but there are times when sharing in an act of remembrance, or a re-enactment, enhances our understanding and enriches our spiritual life.
Mark 14:26-31
"Even though all become deserters, I will not" Mark 14:29
According to Mark (and Matthew) they had already gone to the Mount of Olives when Peter declared his loyalty to Jesus. Luke, by way of contrast, has the group going to the Mount of Olives after this exchange. Does the physical location change the sentiment of Peter? No. Does the physical location change the prophetic word of Jesus? No.
No matter where it took place this is an important incident in the human drama of the Passion. Peter was the outspoken, upfront character among the disciples. He was the strong one - and as prone to act before thinking, or to use his tongue before his brain was put into gear (at least it seems that way at times). His role after the resurrection and in the years of the early church reveals the strength and qualities of his character - as well as the power of the Holy Spirit to transform these raw materials.
And so it was that he declared his intention to stick with Jesus in the time of his trial.
"Even though others desert you, said Peter, I will not! Even if I must die with you, said Peter, I will not deny you"
His loyalty was not to be questioned, and his desire to stand with Jesus was strong. As events unfolded Peter was unable to hold to his word. No doubt events overtook him, and that which he faced was a far greater challenge than he had ever faced before. Peter will appear again in this passion narrative - and because of the humanity we share we will find it difficult to judge him harshly.
How often are our desires pure and noble, yet we stumble into selfishness and self-protection, and fail to do what is right? How often do we start with good intentions, only to fall short when the going gets tough? How often do we fail to do what we have said because situations or circumstances overwhelm us?
There is much of Peter in all of us.
It is my prayer that my desires and intentions might be strong, as were those of Peter, and that the Holy Spirit might give me the power to be faithful, no matter what!
Mark 14:1-2
"...they said 'Not during the festival or there may be a riot among the people'".
Mark 14:2
The Passion narrative is a complete unit of tradition - unlike much of what has preceded it. Three gospels record events almost in the same sequence, while John's variation is a focus on Jesus words and prayers, and is much more reflective. The Passion Narrative is a sustained unit of tradition - yet custom has the church dealing with the various scenes in this story over five days. More time is needed to consider the various aspects.
We begin this reading with the immediate introduction of tension - the plot to kill Jesus. Time is set (two days before the Passover), and intention declared, but there is a restricting factor to the plan of the Jewish religious leaders - the popularity of Jesus.
The sheer number of people in Jerusalem for the Passover, and the general level of support for Jesus - made Jesus' opponents wary. The Passover was not the time. A riot was feared. But it did not work out according to their initial ideas. God had other plans - and while the chief priests and scribes may have 'taken advantage' of opportunities presented and so achieved their ends - it was not their schedule that was run. What God plans and what we plan may coincide, but when they do not we need to look to God's timing - it will always win out.
Our plans for 2008 had long been a sabbatical year. In 2009 we finally got to take that time out, just 12 months delayed. For reasons related to work alone we knew early in 2007, perhaps even earlier in 2006, that 2008 would not be the year. As things unfolded during the year they revealed just how right the actual timing, God's timing, was. As 2009 unfolds for us that has been confirmed again.
The chief priests and scribes had their idea about when things should happen. God had other ideas.
Mark 14:3-9
"For you shall always have the poor with you, and you can show kindness to them whenever you wish; but you will not always have me." Mark 14:3-9
At the house of Simon the leper - or Simon the former leper (if he really was a leper they would not have gone near his house) - Jesus and his disciples were sharing a meal. This incident is recorded in all four gospels, and Mark's version of this event is in a somewhat unusually identified location.
The gospels vary in small (and sometimes important) details. Mark (with Matthew) has an alabaster jar, the anointing of Jesus' head, and identifies the unnamed woman's action as preparation for burial.
Differences between accounts need not concern us unduly, unless we want every word in Scripture to be the literal historic truth. An event occurred, and like any witnesses or participants three of four different versions of the incident vary in their details. There is also the possibility that one of the four 'anointings' was a completely separate incident. It would be unusual if eyewitnesses all saw and heard the same thing, and responded to it in exactly the same way. That would suggest one witness, whose story became the 'authorised version', rather than four witnesses sharing their story and their perspective.
In three of the accounts the reaction of the onlookers focuses on the waste of resources, almost a year's wages for a labourer have been tipped over Jesus' head. Such an extravagant act is an act of great love and devotion.
To the onlookers concerned about money (and I would have been among them) Jesus pointed to the universal presence of the poor - and his very temporary stay. Her act of devotion was graciously accepted.
What do we do now to show the depth of our love and devotion? Jesus isn't around for us to give him extravagant gifts - and the poor remain, they are always with us.
In Matthew 25:31-36 we read Jesus' parable of the sheep and the goats. We learn that if we care for or minister to the sick, hungry or poor we are, as it were, pouring oil on Jesus' head.
As I write this in Tanzania, one of the poorest countries in the world, there are orphans on the street, even though I cannot identify them. There are a few beggars, mainly older ladies, who occasionally approach for a few shillings. There are families who struggle to put food on the table and to pay for clothing. They are around me, and I am not yet able to see or know who they are and what their struggle. There are many who strive for an education, a chance to get a regular job, and the possibility of a brighter future, The poor cannot afford to pay the fees for secondary school, let alone a tertiary education for the brightest among them. The poor we will always have with us.
Our love for Jesus should cause us to reach for the oil, and choose where to pour it. As we offer our gifts we will be preparing others for life, Scripture tells us that it will be as though we are giving our gift to Jesus.
Mark 14:10-11
"Then Judas Iscariot, who was one of the Twelve, went to the chief priests in order to betray him to them." Mark 14:10
This we do not understand!
The One who taught with authority, healed the sick, exorcised demons, crossed the boundaries of social and religious tradition and healed lepers, women and foreigners, and welcomed children into his presence, was betrayed by one of his followers. Why?
By placing Judas' visit to the chief priests after the anointing at Bethany the betrayal is linked to money. References to money in Mark 14:5 & 11 serve to make that connection as the passion narrative begins.
Mark writes that they 'promised' to give Judas money. Matthew makes this transaction explicit and identifies a payment of "30 pieces of silver" (Mt 26:15). In contrast, Luke makes no mention of this incident. He has shaped the anointing incident (Lk 7:36-50) to focus on forgiveness. It has no place in his passion narrative, and the first hint of betrayal comes at the Lord's Supper. (Lk 20:21-23). Judas is identified as the betrayer only in the garden of Gethsemane (Lk 22:47). John shares this scenario with Luke, but has added an aside in his version of the anointing. In John, Judas is the one who asked about the waste of money, and with that question and the aside about future betrayal, Judas treachery is linked in our minds.
So the four gospels point to the finger at Judas as the mercenary betrayer. He sold Jesus for "30 pieces of silver".
Most people do not act out of singular motives. Helping the poor, for example, is a good thing to do. But id we are honest we would acknowledge that it also gives us a good feeling. For some it may also ease some guilt, or give them an interest in life beyond themselves, a project to invest in perhaps. At the same time it may even offer a tax break. And we must also remember that Scripture (Jewish and Christian) commands it. Motivation can include a number of different yet interrelated factors - it can be very complex.
So, too, Judas betrayal of Jesus. It may have been a money thing, but so many other aspects come into play. Was Judas disappointed with the 'other-worldly' emphasis of Jesus, whose kingdom was 'not of this world'? Was he a revolutionary at heart, who saw in Jesus one who would bring about the restoration of the nation of the Jews as in independent country? Was he longing for the restoration of the kingdom of David? Could it be that his traditional religious perspectives had been threatened as Jesus challenged the teachings of the chief priests, and the scribes? Could the increasing opposition to Jesus have caused Judas to be concerned about his own survival, and prompted him to protect himself?
Money is the easy answer...for it seems that we all believe that every person has his price. Thirty pieces of silver was a lot of money. Other motivating factors are not always obvious, nor are they always shared. For the gospel writer's money is the obvious connection. When looking at our own motivation we would do well to look past the obvious and explore honestly our innermost thoughts and feelings. Pure motives are great. The nature of our humanity, however, is that very few things we do come from a place of purity!
Mark 14:12-25
"This is my body... this is my blood." Mark 14:22,24
Timing is everything!
Jesus had already paved the way and prepared the place, Two disciples had to follow his instructions and then prepare for the Passover meal. For Jews this event was a part of the cult, a practice that reminded them of where they had come from, and who they were. It was a celebration of their past and an affirmation of their identity.
Jesus met with his disciples to celebrate. Normally this was a family event, and Jesus met with his 'new' family - the disciples.
Mark's account is simple and straightforward, and gives prediction of Jesus' betrayal equal space with the institution of the Lord's Supper. (Jesus ate with his betrayer, but Mark gives no further indication of who that betrayer would be. He was with them - so it was clearly one of the Twelve.) We note that in Mark's gospel it is a leader heading that suggests or implies the introduction of a new ritual. Mark told the story - later editors have imposed their understanding (or the understanding of their tradition) as most of our translations have section headings that were not part of the original text. Nothing Jesus had done up to now has pointed to a practice that should be repeated, and nothing in Mark's text around this event points that way either!
In the Passover celebration the breaking of bread and the drinking of wine carry particular significance. Jesus used these rituals, and renewed them, imbued them with new significance as he shared them with the Twelve. The bread that was broken was his body, the wine his blood -"the blood of the covenant poured out for many"(14:24)
How the disciples understood this at the time we do not know, Later the reality would hit home. It is no wonder they repeated this event, and later on it became 'an institution' and one of the sacraments of the Church.
Our remembrance of Jesus through the re-enactment of the Lord's Supper will help us to envisage the scene, experience the emotion, understand the pain, and embrace the cross.
For many followers of Jesus the practice of the Lord' Supper (the Eucharist or Holy Communion) defines who they are. It is part of their identity.
Participation in such a ritual does not make is Christians or followers of Jesus, but there are times when sharing in an act of remembrance, or a re-enactment, enhances our understanding and enriches our spiritual life.
Mark 14:26-31
"Even though all become deserters, I will not" Mark 14:29
According to Mark (and Matthew) they had already gone to the Mount of Olives when Peter declared his loyalty to Jesus. Luke, by way of contrast, has the group going to the Mount of Olives after this exchange. Does the physical location change the sentiment of Peter? No. Does the physical location change the prophetic word of Jesus? No.
No matter where it took place this is an important incident in the human drama of the Passion. Peter was the outspoken, upfront character among the disciples. He was the strong one - and as prone to act before thinking, or to use his tongue before his brain was put into gear (at least it seems that way at times). His role after the resurrection and in the years of the early church reveals the strength and qualities of his character - as well as the power of the Holy Spirit to transform these raw materials.
And so it was that he declared his intention to stick with Jesus in the time of his trial.
"Even though others desert you, said Peter, I will not! Even if I must die with you, said Peter, I will not deny you"
His loyalty was not to be questioned, and his desire to stand with Jesus was strong. As events unfolded Peter was unable to hold to his word. No doubt events overtook him, and that which he faced was a far greater challenge than he had ever faced before. Peter will appear again in this passion narrative - and because of the humanity we share we will find it difficult to judge him harshly.
How often are our desires pure and noble, yet we stumble into selfishness and self-protection, and fail to do what is right? How often do we start with good intentions, only to fall short when the going gets tough? How often do we fail to do what we have said because situations or circumstances overwhelm us?
There is much of Peter in all of us.
It is my prayer that my desires and intentions might be strong, as were those of Peter, and that the Holy Spirit might give me the power to be faithful, no matter what!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)