From the Lectionary for 3 November 2024 (Proper 26B)

Mark 12:28-34 (NRSV)

One of the scribes came near and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that he answered them well, he asked him, “Which commandment is the first of all?” Jesus answered, “The first is, ‘Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ The second is this, ‘You shall love your neighbour as yourself.’ There is no other commandment greater than these.” Then the scribe said to him, “You are right, Teacher; you have truly said that ‘he is one, and besides him there is no other’; and ‘to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength,’ and ‘to love one’s neighbour as oneself,’—this is much more important than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices.” When Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, “You are not far from the kingdom of God.” After that no one dared to ask him any question.

~

"The religious and the secular powers have been shown to be transcended by the new community of the victim called “resurrection.” What then shall be the power of the new community? How shall society be preserved from chaos if not by [burnt offerings] and sacrifices? And what shall be the basis of law (prohibition) in the new community?

"A lawyer who has been impressed by the astuteness of Jesus’ answers asks him for the fundamental principle of the law. Jesus answers with the Shema, which is essentially a prohibition on idolatry. The love of God with all one’s powers leaves no love for other gods. If there is to be a new, community, it must be founded on the renunciation of idolatry, which is the worship of sacrificial violence in the guise of the deified victim. The renunciation of idolatry entails the renunciation of vengeance.

"The demand for the renunciation of vengeance takes the positive form of the command to love the neighbor as the self. The full quotation from Lev 19:18 is, “You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.” It is clearly a proscription of the fundamental principle of law, vengeance. The web of reciprocity must be broken and replaced by a network of love if there is to be a new community, and for that to happen the idol of the primitive Sacred must be forsworn.

"Jesus rejects the whole panoply of sacred violence in its first principle as idolatry and its social manifestation as vengeance. The lawyer is the one who expresses this fact when he says, “You spoke elegantly and truly, teacher, when you said that Cod is one and there is no other besides him, and that to love him with a whole heart and a whole mind and a whole strength and to love the neighbor as oneself is more than [burnt offerings] and sacrifices” (12:32-33). Jesus did not speak the words about [burnt offerings] and sacrifices; the lawyer added them, and we can only understand them as a summary of all that has gone before in the section beginning with the incident in the temple and the ensuing questioning of Jesus. The lawyer had been listening to the exchanges and was impressed by Jesus’ answers. He is not far from the kingdom because he understands the import of Jesus’ teaching on the non-sacrificial nature of the new community.

"The antagonists are silenced. “No one dared to question him any more” (12:34). It is now clear that a new society called “resurrection” is at hand, based on true transcendence and mutual love, and not on the law of vengeance and the order of the scapegoat. Jesus represents something more than the order of [burnt offerings] and sacrifices; he represents a new and different possibility of love."

- Robert Hamerton-Kelly, The Gospel and the Sacred, pp.30-34

~

"First let's concentrate on the Shema. The first commandment, curiously, is not 'love'. The first commandment is 'listen'. “Listen O Israel.” It's the collective listening. That is something which Jesus is indicating is the first and major commandment.

"We usually immediately go to the 'you must love God and your neighbour as yourself' bit, but as a good son of Israel, Jesus knows that the first commandment is 'listen'. It's being audibly under the voice of God, stretching your hearing, together with others, constantly trying to listen to the voice of God. That's at the beginning of the first commandment, there's no loving God with out that. The whole point of loving is not... 'okay, you've told me what to do now I must get on and do it, that's our problem'. No, in order to be able to love you have to undergo listening, that's the first commandment.

[...]

"So Jesus is interpreting [the commandments] in that sense: there's no love of God that is not also a love of neighbour. I'd just like to ask us to stop and think about that, because, at least psychologically for me, that's always been a tough one - knowing how. You say you should love God with all your heart with all your soul with all your mind and the strength - what on earth does that mean? I understand, you know, pushing a trunk uphill with all my heart with all my soul with all my mind and my strength - it's something that I can feel myself doing. I have no idea what it means to love God with all my heart, my soul, my strength, my will, because God is not a trunk or an equivalent thing - God is not a stock exchange or a house or a boyfriend or a girlfriend.

"It doesn't seem obvious how you fulfil the command, and yet the criterion is now given: the criterion is your neighbour as yourself. In other words, it's exercising all the qualities which are referred to God with your neighbour, without rivalry. There is no rivalry between the loving of God and the loving of your neighbour. On the contrary, the loving of your neighbour is the criterion for loving God. That's the absolutely central linking of these two, which is again one of the pillar teachings of Christianity.

[...]

"[T]he scribe was so pleased, because he understood perfectly well that Jesus had answered the question with relation to the one God, and with relation to the cleaving to [God] and how one worships [God] with relation to the neighbour, in such a way as to say, “Yes, I may have threatened, indeed prophesied the collapse of the temple, but I'm not here to set up another temple. What I'm going to be doing is going to be done as a witness to you for how you create [...] neighbourliness, fraternity. [...] That's what I'm going to be doing. In other words, you don't need to be frightened that what I am coming to introduce is another temple, a different sort of burnt offering. It's not a burnt offering at all. I'm going to be giving myself and creating the temple without hands that will in fact enable us all to become neighbours, and all to worship the God who is One.” So this is why the scribe goes away happy.

"“When Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, 'You are not far from the kingdom of God.' After that no one dared to ask him any question.” Very interesting. Why didn't they dare? Well, he'd given the three pillar teachings, and in each one he'd shown himself to be absolutely loyal and central to the faith of Israel, absolutely understanding of the central texts of Israel, and absolutely determined to create neighbourliness without rivalry in what he was planning to do. In other words, those who wanted to get rid of him would have to do so by false accusation, they couldn't take anything that he had said.

"And that is the end of their formal attempts to trap him in the first place, but later, as in the case of the scribe, to begin to see that here was something really interesting, and something not to be frightened of. So the scribe was able to go away having been blessed. [...] Non-rivalry between God and neighbour is going to be introduced fully in line with the faith of Israel."

- James Alison, from video "Homily for Sunday 31 in Ordinary Time 2021" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLT43GG2ZpA)

[Source of Robert Hamerton-Kelly quote, and for analysis and discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper26b/]

From the Lectionary for 27 October 2024 (Proper 25B)

Mark 10:46-52 (NRSV)

They came to Jericho. As he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho, Bartimaeus son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the roadside. When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” Many sternly ordered him to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” Jesus stood still and said, “Call him here.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart; get up, he is calling you.” So throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. Then Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind man said to him, “My teacher, let me see again.” Jesus said to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way.

~

"The story of Jesus healing the blind man Bartimaeus is considered by many Bible scholars to be the closing bookend of what is called an inclusio. An inclusio is a literary device where two passages echo each other in such a way as to create bookends for the material in between them. In this portion of Mark, the two echoing stories involve the healing of a blind man. The material between these two stories is the journey to Jerusalem. The first healing (Mark 8: 22-26) takes place at Bethsaida. The second takes place as Jesus arrives at Jericho, the last stop before arriving in Jerusalem. In the intervening material the journey is punctuated by Jesus’ three predictions of his Passion coupled with the incomprehension of his disciples. Each of these predictions is also accompanied by disputes among the disciples as to who is the greatest.

"The blindness of the two men who need healing is often thought to represent the blindness of the disciples which also needs healing. With the man in Bethsaida, Jesus needs two tries to get the healing right, suggesting that the blindness of the disciples is difficult to heal. The much easier healing of the man in Jericho suggests hope that the disciples, though still blind, will also be healed.

"I agree with this interpretation of the inclusio but there is something else that has caught my attention. [...] When Bartimaeus cries out, the people in the crowd rebuke him and tell him to be quiet. Far from helping Bartimaeus in getting a healing, they try to hinder him. In this, they act the apostles who just a short time ago had tried to keep the mothers from bringing their children to Jesus. Moreover, the crowd has shifted its focus from Jesus to Bartimaeus and in an adversarial way at that. Again, this matches the disciples who focused on each other in their altercations rather than on Jesus.

"If the crowd at this point is an extension of the disciples, then they badly need healing and yet, the more healing they need for their blindness, the more resistant they are to healing. Bartimaeus, in calling out to Jesus by his Messianic title shows that he sees more than those who theoretically have eyes."

- Andrew Marr, Abbot of St. Gregory’s Abbey (Three Rivers, MI), from blog post titled “The Blind Man Who Could See.” (https://andrewmarrosb.blog/2015/10/22/the-blind-man-who-could-see/)

~

"Then Jesus said to him, ‘What do you want me to do for you?’” There’s the self-revealing question again. “What do you want me to do for you?” Remember James and John’s answer was “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” How will the blind man reply by contrast?

"He begins, “My teacher,” not just teacher but “my” teacher. This is personal and relational. He feels close to Jesus. He believes his teacher has something to teach him. He knows he is not a self-made, self-contained and self-actualized reservoir of individuality. He acknowledges his dependency, his need for Jesus and the warmth and respect he feels coming from Jesus. Our hearts soften as we hear them talk to each other.

"“My teacher, let me see again.” A simple expression of a simple wish. He wants to be made whole, to see in living color and see his teacher’s face. His request is not referenced to any other human being. He doesn’t want to be better than anyone else, even other people who are blind. He asks not to be served, only made whole."

- Tom Truby, from a sermon titled “Blind Bartimaeus and the Sons of Thunder Meet Themselves in What They Ask For.” (https://girardianlectionary.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Truby-Proper25-2018-Blind-Bartimaeus-and-the-Sons-of-Thunder-Meet-Themselves-in-What-They-Ask-For.pdf)

~

"Jericho only gets mentioned as a place that they come to and effectively go through. So here is Jericho. Jericho is a Benjaminite city, and we'll see why that's important later. But more important for this particular purpose it was a standard place from which people would make the pilgrimage up to Jerusalem [...].

"And, of course, no one could do it on the Sabbath. So one of the things that you would have on at dawn after the Sabbath would be people gathered to start together to make the trip up to Jerusalem, a large crowd of people. So not only Jesus and his disciples but a large crowd were leaving Jericho - that would have been standard particularly the morning after the Sabbath. And remember that this is the day in which Jesus gets to Jerusalem. He comes in on donkeys, so it's what we call Palm Sunday.

[..]

"So here they are, they're all about to leave heading up, when suddenly Bartimaeus, son of Timaeus, a blind beggar was sitting by the roadside. Okay, but the name is repeated twice means we're meant to pay a lot of attention to it. And here's the thing: it's a pun in Greek and in Aramaic. In Greek, “Timaeus” means worthy, honourable, bearer of prestige. In Aramaic, it can mean disgraced, poor. It has these two meanings together, and we're going to see in a second why that's so important because the pun is going to respond to something very real.

"Anyhow, he's blind and he's a beggar, so he's doing something - he's begging, asking people for things as they go by. And he's sitting by the roadside. A wonderful memory comes up of a great figure of the Old Testament who blind sat by the roadside waiting for news of the Ark of [the Covenant]. And this was Eli - you remember, the great priest who had taken Samuel the prophet on as his acolyte, and whose two sons, Phinehas and Hophni, had been such bad models and were killed in battle, lost the Ark; and Eli had fallen over backwards. He'd been sitting by the side of the road, he'd fallen over backwards and died when he heard this news.

[...]

"Shortly before Eli dies, he's approached by another prophet, simply a man of God who comes to tick off Eli and his family. He says: “Now the Lord declares, far be it from me, for those who honour me, I will honour, and those who despise me shall be treated with contempt. See a time has come when I will cut off your strength and the strength of your ancestors' family so that no one in your family will live to old age. The fate of your two sons shall be a sign to you: both of them shall die on the same day. I will raise up for myself a faithful priest who shall do according to what is in my heart and in my mind. I will build him a sure house and he shall go in and out before my anointed forever. Everyone who is left in your family shall come to implore him for a piece of silver or a loaf of bread.”

"I hope you can see that what we have here [in Mark's Gospel] is the fulfilment of the honour/dishonour paradox in that prophecy. What we have is the descendant of Eli here waiting, longing for the true priest, the true son of David, to come along who will establish the new house and will undo his dishonour and enable him to come back to honour again.

"“When he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and say: Jesus, son of David, have mercy on me!” So this is the beginnings of the reference to the son of David. This is very important here because it's the whole of the Passion narrative is going to depend very much on Jesus fulfilling the David narrative. Remember, going up to Jerusalem was what David did in order initially to conquer it when it was a Jebusite city. During David's conquest of Jerusalem, some blind people and some lame people got in the way and he said - this is in 2 Samuel - he got cross with them and said, “May the blind and the lame never be on the mountain.” So they could never come into the Temple. [...] But here this appears to be one of the blind who wasn't allowed to go up, couldn't go up because of David's curse.

"So, here this is someone who's bearing with him so much, if you like, of the curses of old Israel: the failed nature, a failed priesthood, a blind person who couldn't go up, who couldn't fulfil the promised pilgrimage. But he hears that it's Jesus of Nazareth. So he knows something about this, he realises that a prophecy is being fulfilled: “Jesus son of David have mercy on me!” [...] In other words, he knows that at last that which old Eli had been waiting for, the promised Ark, the promised Priest, the one who would undo the disgrace was coming along.  

[...]

"So, he wanted to see, but notice he said it straight away. He's begging, so he's used to asking for things, but what he really wants is to see, to be the priest he was supposed to be. Whereas James and John, if you remember [in the passage directly preceding, covered in last week's lectionary], had made a request for the place of honour, and it was only later that they began to understand what they had really asked for, he, Bartimaeus had worked through the begging and now wanted what really mattered.

"And Jesus says to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” He doesn't say follow him, he says go, because he's not asking to be followed once, he's saying 'go up to Jerusalem, go on this route you can now [take], you're no longer forbidden from going up to the temple'. “Immediately he regained his sight and followed him on the way.” In other words he becomes the model disciple without even needing to be told that this, what's going on, can only really be learned in the following. He goes up with them and will no doubt now be a witness to the events that will unfold from later that day when, after the very long walk, they get to Jerusalem - come in on the donkeys - and the week of the Passion begins."

- James Alison, from video "Homily for Sunday 30th in Ordinary Time 2021" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnrLpMyrrDE)

[Source of links to Andrew Marr blog and Tom Truby sermon, and for discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper25b/]

From the Lectionary for 20 October 2024 (Proper 24B)

Mark 10:35-45 (NRSV)

James and John, the sons of Zebedee, came forward to him and said to him, “Teacher, we want you to do for us whatever we ask of you.” And he said to them, “What is it you want me to do for you?” And they said to him, “Grant us to sit, one at your right hand and one at your left, in your glory.” But Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Are you able to drink the cup that I drink, or be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?” They replied, “We are able.” Then Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink you will drink; and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized; but to sit at my right hand or at my left is not mine to grant, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared.”

When the ten heard this, they began to be angry with James and John. So Jesus called them and said to them, “You know that among the Gentiles those whom they recognize as their rulers lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. But it is not so among you; but whoever wishes to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be slave of all. For the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

~

"The significance of [Mark 10:38-40] in our present discussion is massive. For Mark, it is clear that the two brigands on Jesus’s right and left, as described in 15:27, are the ones to whom “it’s been assigned already.” But that means, as we might have concluded from other evidence too, that Jesus’s crucifixion is the moment when he becomes king, when, as James and John say, he is “there in all [his] glory” (10:37). That is the powerful - if deeply paradoxical! - “coming of the kingdom” as spoken of in Mark 9:1. But the arrival of the kingdom in that way will not mean that James and John, and many others too, can look forward to an easy utopia thereafter. On the contrary, they will still have to drink Jesus’s cup and be baptized with his baptism, in other words, to share his suffering and quite possibly his death. (This happened to James quite quickly, as we discover in Acts 12:2.)

"It is in this context, as we have already seen, that we find the kingdom and the cross in close juxtaposition. Jesus contrasts the normal practice of pagan rulers with his own vision of power and prestige: “Anyone who wants to be great among you must become your servant” (10:43). This is at the centre of his vision of the kingdom.

"And this is not only illustrated, but instantiated, by Jesus’s own vocation: “The son of man didn’t come to be waited on. He came to be the servant, to give his life ‘as a ransom for many’” (10:45). This saying, so far from being (as has often been suggested) a detached, floating nugget of “atonement theology” within early church tradition that Mark or his source has tacked on to a story about something else (the reversal of normal modes of power), is in fact the theologically and politically apposite climax to the whole train of thought. What we call “atonement” and what we call “kingdom redefinition” seem in fact to be part and parcel of the same thing."

- N.T. Wright, How God Became King: The Forgotten Story of the Gospels, pp. 227-228

~

"Now people often refer [ransom - Gr. 'lutros'] to the Isaiah passage which is our first reading [Isaiah 53:10-11]. I personally think that there's a lot more use of this word 'lutros' in the book of Numbers [Chapter 3], where it describes the selection of Aaron and the family of Levi to be the priests and Levites. Being a priest or a Levite is described as giving yourself as a ransom. So [Jesus] is saying that giving yourself as a ransom is, as it were, stepping into and undoing the sacrificial order. In the case of Israel, initially, it was setting up the sacrificial order. Now that that has served its teaching purpose, now it's up to us to learn to step into it. That's what he's proposing to them.

"And so you have the servant: the waiter [Gr. diakonos]; the slave: the someone under everyone; and the priestly figure, the self-giving priestly figure: the ransom for many. This is a pattern of desire. It's following on from the child - the waiter; the slave - someone who's eyes are fixed on the hands of their master; and then the self-giving priestly figure, all of which Jesus is going to inaugurate so that we can take part. That's going to be our walking towards Jerusalem with him.

"Stick with that. Here we have the beginnings of learning. James and John don't get it so badly wrong as we might think. Jesus is not trying to rebuke them for having desire. He's saying: no, it's good to want these things. You may be asking something that can't be done because it's only discovered in the process what your place is going to be, it's only in the process that you will discover your seats, if you like, your place in the overall picture. And then it's being like a boy, a waiter, someone who hangs around, attentive to others. That's how you're going to be the greatest, and you should want those things, that's wonderful. It's how you get there that's going to be the really important thing."

- James Alison, from video "Homily for Sunday 29 in Ordinary Time 2021" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=InpLiKbS7ug)

~

"First, so as to give the disciples a new model for desire, in the wake of their dispute as to which of them is greatest, Jesus places a small child in their midst, and takes him in his arms (Mark 9:34-37). Shortly afterwards Jesus has to rebuke the disciples for hindering the access of children to him: “whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child shall not enter it” (Mark 10:15).

"Finally, James and John request places of honour, and the jealous indignation of the other disciples boils over (Mark 10:35-45). However, Jesus does not rebuke James and John for their desire - merely indicating to them the sort of tribulations they will have to go through before inheriting it. It is the other ten who are given a lecture presupposing the rivalistic nature of their own desire. James and John seem to have learnt from the child. It is not of course that children are ‘innocent’ in any way at all: it is just that they are less complicated and calculating about knowing what they want, running for it, and insisting on getting it. It is just such a pattern of desire that is able to receive the kingdom of God.

"Did Jesus himself desire in this way? That is to say, was it the ability to imagine an urgent good for himself that enabled him to live as he did and give himself up to death? Apart from what we may deduce from the parables, there is at least one indication that the apostolic witness saw him as desiring in exactly this way, and in this being the model for our desire:

…let us run with perseverance the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the pioneer and perfecter of our faith, who *for the joy that was set before him* endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of God. (Heb. 12:1b-2, my emphasis)

"We cannot, it seems, run away from the fact that the apostolic witness presents Jesus as having, in fact, taught in terms of heavenly rewards, a superabundance of heavenly rewards indeed, and expected these to be a motivating factor in the lives of those who were to follow him, and a motivating factor without any sense of shame that one is following him so as to get something, and something good for me.

"I hope I have shown that this does not depend on a crude ‘pie in the sky’ theology, but is an essential part of the eschatological imagination that Jesus was opening up for the disciples, and the beginnings of the possibility of a morality based on the calling into being and satisfaction of real desires, rather than the castration of, or weird fencing matches with, the desires that already drive us. This eschatological imagination is intrinsically related to the opening up of the vision of God."

- James Alison, The Joy of Being Wrong, pp. 228-229

[Source of quotes from N.T. Wright and James Alison's The Joy of Being Wrong, and for extensive analysis and discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper24b/]

From the Lectionary for 13 October 2024 (Proper 23B)

Mark 10:17-31 (NRSV)

As he was setting out on a journey, a man ran up and knelt before him, and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone. You know the commandments: ‘You shall not murder; You shall not commit adultery; You shall not steal; You shall not bear false witness; You shall not defraud; Honor your father and mother.’” He said to him, “Teacher, I have kept all these since my youth.” Jesus, looking at him, loved him and said, “You lack one thing; go, sell what you own, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me.” When he heard this, he was shocked and went away grieving, for he had many possessions.

Then Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How hard it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!” And the disciples were perplexed at these words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.” They were greatly astounded and said to one another, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “For mortals it is impossible, but not for God; for God all things are possible.”

Peter began to say to him, “Look, we have left everything and followed you.” Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or fields, for my sake and for the sake of the good news, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this age—houses, brothers and sisters, mothers and children, and fields, with persecutions—and in the age to come eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.”

~

"The thought of the French thinker René Girard demonstrates that economic systems, like other interlocking social systems, are part of an all-pervasive system generated by what Girard called “mimetic desire.” That is, when one person wants something, other people are more apt to want it. The more somebody wants something, the more other people want it, not because of the intrinsic vale of whatever is valued but because something is valued. The interlocking of shared desires permeates society, making society a more tightly knotted system than the economical one. This is what the tenth commandment not to covet is all about. Jesus’ eleventh commandment [“You shall not defraud.” (Mk. 10:19)] deepens the tenth: you shall not steal what you covet because you have the social and economic power to do so. Coveting is not a vice only for the rich.

"I am among those who are seriously offended by what some preachers call “the Prosperity Gospel,” which seems to contradict Jesus’ words to the Rich Man. Somewhere (sorry, I can’t remember where), I read that many people who are attracted to the “Prosperity Gospel” are not rich but poor. In mimetic desire, other people model desires for other people. That is, other people tell me and show me what to desire. In the case of the “Prosperity Gospel,” rich people model to the poor what they should desire. We see the same phenomenon among Jesus’ disciples when, after being told how hard it is for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God, asked Jesus: “Then who can be saved?” (Mk. 10: 26) The economic system, then, is fueled by the deeper system of mimetic desire wherein everybody wants to be like the rich landlords who break the tenth and eleventh commandments.

"Jesus, then, is not inviting one person who happens to be rich to change; Jesus is asking all of us to change in such a way that the system is changed. The omnipresence of mimetic desire makes it clear that, important as it is to reform economic structures, it isn’t enough to do the job on its own. Our hearts need a makeover individually and collectively. It is this new system of the heart that Jesus inaugurated at the beginning of his teaching ministry when he proclaimed a Jubilee of freedom from being either a debtor or a creditor. (Lk. 4: 16–21)"

- Andrew Marr, Abbot of St. Gregory’s Abbey (Three Rivers, MI), “The Eleventh Commandment” (https://andrewmarrosb.blog/.../12/the-eleventh-commandment/)

~

"Not only by his words but especially by his whole existence did Jesus call his disciples to follow him. Since his own desires and ambitions were focused on the will of the Father, he assigned the same goal to his disciples. When they saw him praying, they wanted to be able to pray like him (see Luke 11:1). If Jesus’ goal had been a limited good of the senses, unconditional discipleship would necessarily have led to rivalries. But since he renounced immediate desire, he motivated his disciples to similar deeds. They “left everything” and “followed” him (Mark 10:28). To everyone who wanted to gain life in the full sense, he pointed out this way (Mark 10:17-27); and he pointed out to them through his own word and deed the heavenly Father as the one truly desirable good. But this Father is an infinite good. He can therefore be sought after by many, indeed by all human beings without fear of rivalry.

"God as the infinite good is rich enough for all humankind. Jesus also showed that the heavenly Father is no rival to his creatures. In clear contrast to the serpent of the Paradise story, who tried to convince Eve of God’s jealousy, Jesus made it clear, above all with his healings on the Sabbath, that there is no opposition between the service of God and the well-being of humans. The Pharisees by raising certain statements of the Old Testament to the level of principle did set up such an opposition. But Jesus, appealing to other places in scripture, revealed a Father who wants mercy instead of sacrifice (Matt 12:1-8; see Luke 6:1-5). If God demanded sacrifice of men and women, his wish would of necessity enter constantly into conflict with human striving for its own fulfillment. But he wants nothing but the true well-being of his creatures."

- Raymund Schwager, Must There Be Scapegoats?, pp. 176-77

~

"I think this is part of the life of the Gospel, is finding that in fact you do have sisters and brothers and mothers and houses, and a sense of belonging. Maybe it's a weaker belonging than you were accustomed to when you were grasping on, but [it is] being held by this new crowd which Jesus is bringing into being which is called the Church, however poorly our institutional model holds that up. But nevertheless, over time we do find, we have found, these things, along with the persecution.

"“And in the age to come eternal life.” Because this is what God is doing, God is bringing into being the possibility that we can let go of things, and we can start to share, not out of some desire to punish us or make us feel wicked or [...] somehow being evil. To say, no, it's just that you can have more, so you have more when you're not holding onto it. That's how God gives you the singleness of heart, and giving the singleness of heart he enables you [to have] so much more access to belonging, to being, to having, that is not grasped at, but given."

- James Alison, from video "Homily for Sunday 28 in Ordinary Time 2021" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AmBDiD-u21k)

I very highly recommend listening to/watching the whole of James Alison's homily, as he illuminates many details of this Gospel passage that are hidden, or easily missed, particularly in our English translations. For example, the thread of 'one-ness' in the language, (the reason for the emphasis of "singleness of heart" in the quote above), as well as more linguistic and cultural allusions behind the "camel and the eye of the needle" metaphor than you have probably heard before.

[Source of Raymund Schwager quote and link to Andrew Marr's blog, and for extensive analysis and discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper23b/]

From the Lectionary for 6 October 2024 (Proper 22B)

Mark 10:1-16 (NRSV Updated Edition)

He left that place and went to the region of Judea and beyond the Jordan. And crowds again gathered around him, and, as was his custom, he again taught them.

Some, testing him, asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?” He answered them, “What did Moses command you?” They said, “Moses allowed a man to write a certificate of dismissal and to divorce her.” But Jesus said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart he wrote this commandment for you. But from the beginning of creation, ‘God made them male and female.’ ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.’ So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

Then in the house the disciples asked him again about this matter. He said to them, “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

People were bringing children to him in order that he might touch them, and the disciples spoke sternly to them. But when Jesus saw this, he was indignant and said to them, “Let the children come to me; do not stop them, for it is to such as these that the kingdom of God belongs. Truly I tell you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will never enter it.” And he took them up in his arms, laid his hands on them, and blessed them.

~

"How did it become this situation where women belong to men and are subordinate to them? People married to each other aren’t two individuals fighting each other or one holding absolute power over the other so that they can’t fight. No, they are no longer two at all, but one flesh. Each side to the union constantly yields to the other. God made us this way; and strangely, we become human as we learn how to make it work. We must learn to converse and compromise. We must yield our hearts if we want to be fully human.

"Ironically, Jesus implies that Moses yielded to their hardness of heart in writing his commandment. Moses himself didn’t have to have it just his way. He could compromise. Can the Pharisees compromise or do they make their law higher than those it’s meant to serve? This is not an empty question. [...]

"The disciples, stirred by this, bring it up again when they are alone with Jesus inside a house. This time Jesus answers “Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her; and if a wife divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” He takes a strong position honoring commitment before God and then he adds the missing clause that makes the genders equal. “And if a wife divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.” He holds wives and husbands equally responsible for avoiding adultery. There is no subordinate partner but both stand before God, their creator.

"All along the issue wasn’t marriage and divorce. It was power; who has it, how can it be shared and how to use it for the good of the union. Jesus wants us to take power over ourselves and not the other and to use that power to listen, yield and bless.

"An opportunity to demonstrate this kind of power soon follows. “People were bringing children to Jesus so that he would bless them. But the disciples scolded them.” They didn’t want Jesus to take up his time blessing children. They have no power and therefore don’t count. They have nothing of significance to say and therefore why listen. Just as women have been made subordinate to men, so too, have children. That’s still the way it is in much of the world.

"“When Jesus saw this, he grew angry and said to them, ‘Allow the children to come to me. Don’t forbid them, because God’s kingdom belongs to people like these children.’”  “God’s kingdom belongs to people like these children.” He grants full citizenship to those without power. They are of value too. He became angry with people who cause the little ones to stumble and now he is angry with those pushing the powerless away. For the third week in a row Mark has featured an awareness of the vulnerable and their importance.

"Beginning with the children he widens his description of participants in the new culture he is bringing. Everyone who wants to belong to this community must come to it as a child. You can’t come with arrogance and the assumption of your own superiority. You must be willing to take the other, even the one you consider lesser, into account and listen to them. You must allow yourself to be changed by them, and adapt your own behavior to them. The kingdom of God is a web of dynamic relations each vibrating in response to the other and all are in the web."

- Thomas L. and Laura C. Truby, from sermon delivered on October 4th, 2015 (https://girardianlectionary.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Proper22-2015-Yielding-and-Unyielding-Hearts.doc)

~

"I feel it would be helpful to put this matter of marriage and divorce squarely in its modern context. The institution of marriage has undergone tremendous change over the last several decades, and probably the biggest factor has been the liberation of women within the oppressive structures of a male dominated marriage. There has been so much change that many conservatives still cry out for a backlash or a return to the past. I think that the two parts of our gospel can help us to steer somewhat of a middle road, perhaps.

"The first part, Jesus’ challenge to the hard-hearted Pharisees and their way of oppressing others with all their laws and their false authority, is squarely on the side of liberation. No person, whether religious authority or husband or whomever, should attempt to take God’s place as the authority in another person’s life. The husband is not the head of a household; God is. And we can’t go back to situations of oppressive marriages. Jesus challenges the hard-hearted Pharisees, with their view of marriage and divorce, just as Moses challenged the hard-hearted Pharaoh saying, “Let my people go!” Our faith calls us to liberations of all kinds, calling us to be equal partners, brothers and sisters of our loving “Abba.”

"But the second part of our gospel, in which Jesus calls us to become like children, does bring a word of caution to our liberation movements, I think. We might need to ask ourselves: Do we become so liberated that we cease to see ourselves as God’s children, as still needing to be grounded and rooted in God’s loving desire for us and for Creation? In other words, have our liberation movements sometimes moved us to be equal brothers and sisters but no longer with any parent in our lives? No higher authority other than our own selves? And what is the cost of that loss of grounding in God? Haven’t we [seen] that the fruit of such a move is more rivalry and conflict, not less? So Jesus cautions us that no one can enter God’s household without becoming a child. We cannot be truly brothers and sisters, we cannot truly be equal partners in marriage, unless we have a parent. A loving, heavenly “Abba.”

"Finally, we would be remiss if we didn’t let the last word in a sermon on marriage and divorce be one of forgiveness. Jesus called us to know God as loving “Abba,” as the one who loves us unconditionally, as the one who is always calling us home with a forgiving love that can make us truly God’s children, and, as God’s children, loving brothers and sisters of one another. We are called first of all to be brothers and sisters in baptism.

"And we are called again and again to [the Communion/Eucharist table], where Jesus our older brother offers us God’s forgiveness for all of our sins. He offers us the strength and guidance of learning to becoming like a child. As the Son of God he shows us how to be sons and daughters, obedient to our loving “Abba’s” desire for us."

- Paul J. Nuechterlein, from sermon delivered on October 4-5, 1997 (https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper22b_1997_ser/)

[Source of the sermon links, and for extensive analysis and discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper22b/]

[I also highly recommend James Alison's video "Homily for Sunday 27 in Ordinary Time 2021" : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOXL6U2pnu8]

From the Lectionary for 29 September 2024 (Proper 21B)

Mark 9:38-50 (NRSV)

John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” But Jesus said, “Do not stop him; for no one who does a deed of power in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. Whoever is not against us is for us. For truly I tell you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you bear the name of Christ will by no means lose the reward.

“If any of you put a stumbling block before one of these little ones who believe in me, it would be better for you if a great millstone were hung around your neck and you were thrown into the sea. If your hand causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life maimed than to have two hands and to go to [Gehenna], to the unquenchable fire. And if your foot causes you to stumble, cut it off; it is better for you to enter life lame than to have two feet and to be thrown into [Gehenna]. And if your eye causes you to stumble, tear it out; it is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and to be thrown into [Gehenna], where their worm never dies, and the fire is never quenched.

“For everyone will be salted with fire. Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.”

~

"The extended warning against scandals (9:42-48) seems on the surface to be a stunningly sacrificial text. It commands one to cut off and throw away a hand, foot, or eye that causes one scandal, to expel the wrongdoer in sacrificial style. Cutting (apokoptō, 9:43 et passim) is the essential sacrificial act, and the skill of the sacrificial butcher is most evident in dismembering. Sacrifice is prescribed as the cure for scandal.

"A metaphorical rather than a literal sacrifice is being prescribed. The deconstruction of sacrifice has proceeded so far that the Gospel can use it as an image to convey the moral injunction to resist envy decisively. Scandal, as we have seen, is to love the thing one hates and hate the thing one loves. Scandal is envy, a desire to be like the other that is so intense that it would destroy the other if it cannot be like him, and also if it can. The injunctions to sever offending limbs are hyperbole expressing the urgency of the need to avoid the envy that comes from what one does (hand), where one goes (foot), and what one sees (eye), envy exemplified in the behavior of the disciples just narrated, in their wrangle about who is the greatest, and their attempt to keep the privilege of being Jesus’ agents for themselves.

"The sayings that close this section confirm the sacrificial metaphor. “For everything will be salted with fire” (9:49) is an allusion to the customs of salting the cereal sacrifice and offering salt with every sacrifice (Lev 2:13). The injunction, “Have salt in yourselves, and live in peace with one another” (9:50), applies this metaphor in a moral exhortation to behave so as to achieve the peace that the sacrifice achieved."

- Robert Hamerton-Kelly, The Gospel and the Sacred, pp. 108-109

~

"The call to amputate the offending hand, foot, and eye in verses 43-48 are by any account strange and troubling. Mark seems to be combining the Pauline metaphor of the community as “body” (see “hand, eye, foot” in 1 Corinthians 12:14-26) with the Pauline principle of not causing the “weaker member” to be scandalized (see Romans 14). But think of the modern analogy of the struggle against addiction. The process of recovery often feels like part of oneself (the addicted, codependent part) is being amputated. “Any struggle with addiction [...] involves deprivation,” writes Gerald May in Addiction and Grace. “Every false prop is vulnerable to relinquishment.” Such “amputation” is life-saving surgery on the cancer of our illusions and appetites.

"According to Mark, our greatest individual and social addiction is the will to dominate. Disciples are called to defect from what society may see as natural, such as all the ways “little ones” are routinely victimized by patterns of hierarchy and exclusion. But to do this is to be perceived as “defective” (like the amputee) by the dominant culture. These strange sayings, then, are arguing that it is better to be deformed than to conform to what oppresses more vulnerable members of the body politic.

"In a world of violence and institutionalized inequality, the choices are stark. We either embrace the “fire” of recovery (9:49) or live in the “hell” of addiction (9:48 alludes to the very last line in the book of Isaiah). Salt, used medicinally in antiquity, suggests that the goal is healing (9:49), which must include reconciliation within the community of faith (9:50)."

- Ched Myers, with Marie Dennis, Joseph Nangle, Cynthia Moe-Lobeda, and Stuart Taylor, “Say to This Mountain”: Mark’s Story of Discipleship, pg. 118

~

"[Jesus] uses the word “Gehenna” which strangely is translated as “hell” in all our modern translations, which I think is deeply unhelpful, because Gehenna referred to something really quite physical, which was the trash heap which was constantly burning outside of Jerusalem [...] in the valley. And the contrast was between that, the trash heap with the fire which never went out because it was ever-burning trash, and the Temple up on high with its sacrifices, with salt, where the sacrifices were good things. Except of course [...] what's being brought out is something even bigger than that - the sacrifices on high are to be the lives of the disciples.

"And it's at this point that we get the last two verses... “For everyone will be salted with fire. Salt is good; but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.” So he's saying everyone will be salted... the whole question is, which way is your salt going to work? Is it going to be the salt of Leviticus 2:13 with which all holy sacrifices were salted?

"In other words, are you going to be becoming the new Temple, the one that is coming down promised in Isaiah, the one for which *all* will be salted? And you will therefore show that by being able to give yourselves into the midst of a sacrificial world without being run by a sacrificial mentality, and therefore actually to be able to take part in the bringing into being of the new Creation.

"Or are you going to be part, if you like, of the non-salted, conspiracy-theory-mongering, victimary-thinking group who are in fact going down into the trash where there's a different salt of burning sacrifice, the wrong salt, the trash-heap salt? It is these two are being paralleled with each other.

"He said... “but if salt has lost its saltiness, how can you season it? Have salt in yourselves.” So this is again, for those of us who love the thought of Rene Girard, this is this wonderful suggestion that it's the overcoming of victimary thinking in-between us that turns us into disciples. The work of the Holy Spirit is actually enabling us to become self-givers-away in the midst of victimary circumstances, rather than dwellers in victimhood and conspiracy.

"And therefore, “Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with one another.” He's saying that there are two patterns here: the pattern of the victimary heading to Gehenna, and the pattern the self-giving, avoiding [victimisation], having your desire purified so that you're no longer grabbing, grasping, planning deceit. And you are becoming the new Temple that is promised in Isaiah."

- James Alison, from video "Homily for Sunday 26 in Ordinary Time 2021" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWOcRpum_CY)

[Source of Robert Hamerton-Kelly and Ched Myers quotes, and for analysis and discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper21b/]

From the Lectionary for 22 September 2024 (Proper 20B)

Mark 9:30-37 (NRSV Updated Edition)

They went on from there and passed through Galilee. He did not want anyone to know it, for he was teaching his disciples, saying to them, “The Son of Man is to be betrayed into human hands, and they will kill him, and three days after being killed, he will rise again.” But they did not understand what he was saying and were afraid to ask him.

Then they came to Capernaum, and when he was in the house he asked them, “What were you arguing about on the way?” But they were silent, for on the way they had argued with one another who was the greatest. He sat down, called the twelve, and said to them, “Whoever wants to be first must be last of all and servant of all.” Then he took a little child and put it among them, and taking it in his arms he said to them, “Whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me, and whoever welcomes me welcomes not me but the one who sent me.”

~

"So he's beginning to teach [his disciples] that the point of his going to his death is not, “I'm going to leave a vacuum and one of you is going to have to fill it, I wonder who is the greatest,” but it's “You're all going to have to undergo the way of death, dying to yourselves, so as to learn to be what I have been for others.”

"And then he takes a little child, remember, a 'non-person' - the ancient peoples did not have our sentimental ideas about childhood at all, children were non-persons. He takes a child and stands him... among them. So first of all he stands the child, which is the position of one who is going to speak, and then he embraces him, cuddles him in his arms, before them. Now, if what you were was the one who wanted to be greatest, what you were particularly keen on is who was the master's favourite, so here Jesus is actually using [imitative] desire to draw attention to his favourite - his favourite is a little child, it's not one of them, it's a little child - a non-person is his favourite. They are supposed to look at that and be very jealous that they are not being cuddled in Jesus's arms.

"Then he says to them, “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me” - it is by receiving a non-person that you receive me - “and whoever receives me receives the one who sent me” - if you want to receive the Father then receive this non-person. In other words, this whole dynamic of the relationship between Father and Son is now to be between brother receiving non-person - that's how you enter into the life of the Father.

[...]

"[H]ere we have the unimportant one being placed before them in a position of speaking [ie. in the centre of the circle] and said that the [ones who] want to be great [...] have to occupy that position and learn to speak from that position [of the unimportant one, the non-person]. This is how we are going to learn to listen to Jesus and that means how we are going to learn to obey the Father. This is part of Jesus's teaching technique, attempting to produce a real change in the apostolic group's life so that by the time they get to the cross they might have the first idea of what he's been talking about."

- James Alison, from video "Homily for Sunday 25 in Ordinary Time 2021" (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F6ncp8fbIE)

~

"The poetics of place are essential in the communicative strategy of this determinative pericope. They take us to the sacred center and show us there that the Sacred has been dethroned by the Servant. Jesus and the disciples are in Capernaum, in a house, and Jesus takes his place as teacher by sitting down. The disciples have been engaged in the old argument of envy, about who is the greatest in their little universe (9:34). Jesus calls them into a circle around him (we infer the circle from the placing of the child “in the middle”), and teaches by word and deed. By word he says, “If anyone desires to be first he shall be the last of all and the servant of all” (9:35). Then he teaches by deed what it means to be the servant of all, first taking a child and placing it in their midst, and then taking it up in his arms, with the words, “Whoever receives one such little one in my name receives me, and whoever receives me receives not me but the one who sent me” (9:36-37).

"To receive rather than to expel is the mark of the new community of the kingdom. The message in the symbol of the child is that preeminent dignity in the kingdom goes to the one who is “last of all and the servant of all” (9:35). Jesus’ dramatic gesture of taking a child into his arms says that the greatest in the kingdom is the one who can receive those who have no power or prestige as if they were Jesus himself (9:37). This humility is clearly an antidote to the mimetic rivalry present in the disciples’ argument about who among them is the greatest.

"The poetics of place locate this act of inclusion at the center of space - in the town, in the house, in the circle, in the arms of Jesus. At the center, where in Sacred terms the holy absence skulks, sits Jesus with a child in his arms. The place at the center of the circle is the place of the victim during a stoning. Jesus and the child take that place. The gesture of taking the little one into his arms reverses the order of the Sacred. It dramatizes the inclusiveness of the new community by embracing rather than stoning or expelling the powerless one.

"By means of this symbol and these poetics of space, the Gospel tells us that the new community replaces the conspiracy of the Sacred by neutralizing the power of envy. In the conspiracy of the sacred mob, envy binds the members to one another in the scandalous bonds of rivalry and desire. No one can be found caring for the victim or siding with the weak, because that would be surrendering in the battle for prestige. The Gospel declares that such defeat is not loss but real preeminence in the order of the new community. The pericope of the child at the center is the summary symbol of the church as the nonsacrificial community."

- Robert Hamerton-Kelly, The Gospel and the Sacred, pg. 108

[Source of Robert Hamerton-Kelly quote, and for analysis and discussion on all this week's lectionary texts: https://girardianlectionary.net/reflections/year-b/proper20b/]