Epiphany 6B, 2009
Mark 1:40-45
A Liturgy is also available
‘SNORTING INDIGNATION’ AT THE EDGES, WHILE PUSHING BOUNDARIES
It seems the most common area of dispute between neighbours
is not loud music,
or late night parties,
or even dogs that poop on one’s nature strip.
(Although that is a real pain!)
The most common area of dispute is the boundary fence.
It’s colour.
It’s material.
It’s cost.
It’s position.
This morning’s story of the healing of a so-called ‘leper’ or ‘unclean’ one,
by the one we call Mark, is also about boundaries.
Because the religion in which Jesus grew up - noble, ethical, admirable -
had arrived at a place where it apparently drew such strict boundaries,
most people were on the other side of them.
And taking seriously the context of this particular story,
anyone with a noticeable disfigurement or abnormality,
whatever that may be,
was bound under the religious rule of the day
to announce his or her coming.
To carry, as it were, his or her own boundary.
“Unclean, unclean” the ‘leper’ probably said, as he approached the Jewish sage, Jesus.
Now traditionally there has been much said about the so-called purity Laws,
and christian interpretations given the 686 commandments
have not always been helpful.
Such interpretations usually paint all Jews of Jesus’ time
as the bad blokes, and Jesus as the good bloke.
Which is not only unfair, and at times, untrue, it is also dangerous (Levine 2006:28-29).
Needless to say, I am not going to play that game!
But what I will say is it appears some level of ‘boundaries’ did help Israel
maintain her identity amid all the other
cultures and religions of the day.
Which of course, is nothing new. Either then. Or now.
We in Australia know all about boundaries.
In the past it was called ‘The White Australia policy’!
Listen to Liberal politican Billy Snedden back in 1969 when,
as Minister for Immigration, he said in parliamentary debate:
“We must have a single culture – if immigrants implied multiculture activities within Australian society, then it was not the type Australia wanted. I am quite determined we should have a monoculture, with everyone living in the same way, understanding each other, and sharing the same aspirations. We don’t want pluralism” (Galvin & West 1988:63).
oo0oo
So let me share with you a couple of things about this story by Mark.
The first is... Jesus did not cure this leper of Hansen’s disease,
the ailment known to modern medicine as leprosy.
In biblical times the term leprosy embraced
a wide range of disorders, including
rashes,
acne,
eczema
and other forms of dermatitis.
Leprosy was sometimes regarded as divine punishment for sin,
but it was not considered an incurable disease.
That’s the first thing.
The second is... our storyteller Mark says a person,
regarded by all as ‘unclean’, approaches Jesus.
And Jesus makes a response.
But what was that response.
Some ancient manuscripts use a word to mean "having pity".
Other manuscripts use a word to mean "being angry".
Those who are members of the Jesus Seminar offer this translation:
“Although Jesus was indignant, he stretched out his hand, touched him, and says to him, ‘Okay - you’re clean!’” (Funk & Hoover 1993:43)
The Inclusive Text which we heard this morning takes a different approach:
“Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, ‘I do choose. Be made clean!’”
Most translations, it seems, have gone with the emotion of "pity" or "compassion".
I can see where both emotions, ‘compassion’ or ‘anger’,
would have been appropriate.
Jesus shows compassion to a person forced to live
on the edges or boundaries of society.
Jesus shows a “snort of anger” (Cairns 2004:24) with a system
that forces such people into that situation.
Ched Myers, in his challenging commentary on Mark
called Binding the Strong Man, suggests:
“The cleansed leper's task is not to publicise a miracle but to help confront an ideological system...” (Myers).
An ideological system which draws boundaries between
the acceptable and the unacceptable,
the ‘clean’ and the ‘unclean’.
And as another commentator has warned:
Be careful when you draw lines. Whenever you draw a line which helps to tell you who is in and who is out of God’s people, remember, Jesus is always on the other side of the line! (Crossan)
oo0oo
Jesus’ vision of the ‘God realm’ or ‘God empire’ was one of inclusive wholeness.
So, in this story by Mark
it restores people’s humanity and life,
it invites people to grasp new opportunities to rejoin the community,
it re-imagines the world.
Jesus’ actions “decontaminated the leper” (Wm Loader Web site, 2003).
But I reckon we miss all of that if we insist this story
is about a supernatural curing
that depends on the intervention of God...
Similarly, the stories which tell of Jesus’ open and inclusive table.
We will miss its radicalness if we only imagine these meals
as casual social acts, as they can be in our modern world.
Back then, the meal or table fellowship was an embodiment of a social vision of
hierarchies,
differences,
distinctions, and
discriminations.
But the ‘open’ meal practice of Jesus became a cultural protest.
It challenged the ethos and politics of holiness
which had led to a closed table fellowship.
“It embodied an alternative vision of an inclusive community reflecting the compassion of God... (and the) absolute equality of people”
(Wheatcroft/TCPC Web site, 2006)
And this vision and this practise clashed fundamentally
with the basic values of ancient Mediterranean society.
Especially where the difference between the rich and the working poor
was often reduced to a mutual competition for status and resources.
oo0oo
The God of Jesus, according to storyteller Mark, is a God
of graciousness and goodness and a booster of self esteem,
who accepts everyone and brings about
justice and well-being for everyone... without exception.
That’s worth celebrating.
And where it is denied, that’s worth getting angry about!
Notes:
Cairns, I. J. 2004. Mark of a Non-realist. A contemporary reading of the second gospel. NZ: Masterton. Fraser Books.
Funk, R.; R. W. Hoover. (ed) 1993. The Five Gospels. The search for the authentic words of Jesus. NY: New York. Macmillan Press.
Galvin, M.; P. West. 1988. A Changing Australia. Themes and case studies. NSW: Marrickville. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Group.
Levine, A-J. 2006. The Misunderstood Jew. The church and the scandal of the jewish Jesus. NY: New York. HarperOne.
Myers, C. 2008. Binding the Strong Man. A political reading of Mark’s story of Jesus. Special edition. NY: Maryknoll. Orbis Books.