Introduction to Gospel
This morning's gospel reading provides us with two stories - one enclosed within the other.
It's a favourite device of the writer.
Mark often starts a story and then apparently digresses,
before returning to his original subject ...
Scholars would argue this is no digression - but a literary device to enhance meaning.
As we listen to the reading, I invite you to hear the two stories –
I've asked two different people to read these, so we will hear them more clearly:
One, a story about Jesus and his family and the other about Jesus and the scribes from Jerusalem - each group opposing what Jesus is doing - each embarrassed by the way Jesus is not playing by the established rules - each trying to exercise damage control - each thinking they are doing the right thing and yet, in thinking they are opposing evil, they are in fact opposing the work of the Holy Spirit.
As we listen, we might ponder where we have seen others – or ourselves - acting like this...
Do we see the crowds attracted to Jesus, flocking to hear his wisdom, pushing into his home, wanting to hear and be near him, wanting to share his food - wanting to be part of this new kin-dom of God? Do we see his family thinking he's out of his mind with his crazy ideas; do we recognise the scribes from Jerusalem, clear about correct theological thinking, pointing out the errors of Jesus' way? Let’s listen for the Gospel
Reading: Mark 3:19b-35
Sermon
I think the Minister of Social Development is a woman with a deep commitment to finding a way to deal with the horrifying and escalating problems of child abuse and neglect we are witnessing in New Zealand families - but I think her approach is deeply misguided.
I think the present government is (sometimes) seeking genuine solutions for our debt-riddled and dependent society - but I think its use of market values to make decisions about people is morally wrong.
I think the Presbyterian Church of Aotearoa New Zealand is desperately seeking ways to be the church for the 21st century - and yet I think it is regulating itself to death.
I think the Roman Catholic Church is doing the same - and I am appalled at this week's ruling that using iPads in worship might ‘confuse the sacred and secular’[1].
As if technology stands somehow outside God-ness.
I'm a person of many opinions - and I hope each of you is too. I recognize that sometimes my opinions are very wrong - and other times they are spot-on. And, I guess that's your experience too. This morning's gospel reading reminds us of how easy it is for us to get it wrong! It also offers us a pointer as we seek to determine our responses to decisions being made by our Government, our Church, our workplace and our families.
Mark’s telling of these two encounters of Jesus with his family and Jesus with the interpreters of the law demonstrate clearly that the institutions you might expect to trust - the institutions of family, church and government - can get it very wrong. The family, the scribes in Jerusalem, the MPs from Wellington, the General Assembly, the Vatican and NZ Conference of Bishops - all these institutions that we might reasonably expect to be trustworthy may be claiming they are working for good, when the exact opposite is the case.
There is no indication in the gospel that Jesus’ family didn’t love him – quite the contrary. If they didn’t care, they would have abandoned him by now– they think he’s out of his mind – he's not acting the way he should – they’ve come to protect him. We’re only in chapter 3 of Mark’s gospel and already Jesus’ behaviour and teaching is drawing a great deal of attention. From the multitudes that are following him, he’s just appointed an inner circle. Perhaps this has been a trigger – maybe the power-base has shifted – whatever the reason, his family have now decided it’s time to take some action. They go stand outside the house, where the crowds have flocked – they don't go in; rather they summon him to come outside – they seek to ‘restrain’ him. They want him to leave behind what he is becoming and to return to their way of being, their way of thinking. They are convinced he is wrong – and they use the language of evil to describe his error.
The Scribes from Jerusalem descend on this little town where Jesus is based. (Did they take this trip especially to deal with him? Today, according to Google maps, this approximately 200km trip would take about 2 hours and 19 minutes. I’m guessing it might have taken a great deal longer then, even if the scribes had taken the shorter 90km route through Samaria). They come to level accusations against him: he is associating with the wrong people – people who are unclean, out of the minds; those who would make others unclean. Jesus’ extraordinary and unacceptable behaviour is proof he is possessed by demons.
All those institutions – of family, church and government – as they make and implement decisions for others – may do so with the best of intentions, even thinking they are opposing evil; but, says Jesus, there’s another, much more important criteria for assessing our actions: decisions that prevent and oppose life-giving outcomes are the ones that are evil. When we prevent the enlivening, dancing, creating work of the Holy Spirit, we are the ones who are out of our minds – we are the ones whose behaviour is evil – and that, says Jesus, is unforgivable.
For here in Mark’s Gospel, we discover that forgiveness does have a limit – “and that limit is reached when those inspired by the Holy Spirit are maligned as being in league with evil”. While compassionate forgiveness is extended to all who make the error of mistaking what is wrong and calling it good, “it is unforgiveable to judge the good as evil.”[2]
I wonder how many times decisions are made – by others and ourselves – where that which is good and innocent is judged as evil and to be punished. I think of pronouncements of an ‘axis of evil’ – of the slaughter of innocent civilians in many different countries – of the ongoing scourge of AIDS in Africa and Asia. And closer to home, it’s not difficult to uncover instances of institutions
we should be able to trust, being so frightened of what they assume to be demons
that vulnerable people, and the systems which should provide their support, are abandoned.
Like the crowds who followed Jesus 2000 years ago, today we have come into the house with him, wanting to share his food. We don’t want to stand outside making judgements, turning our backs on the work of the Holy Spirit. We bring with us our questions, our opinions and concerns about the directions being taken by our families, our church, our country and our world. And we spread that all out here on the Table – alongside the elements of bread and wine, which remind us of the promise of healing, justice and peace for those who are broken – for those whose blood has been spilled – for those whose goodness has been misjudged as evil. And here in the life-giving presence of the Holy Spirit we commit ourselves once more to work towards bringing about the kin-dom of God, as Jesus envisaged it to be.
[1] “Mobile phones, iPads, no match for Missal” by Alison Rudd, Otago Daily Times June 2012 quoting Father John Harrison of St Joseph’s Cathedral Dunedin who “says he has no problem with a ruling [from the New Zealand Catholic Bishops Conference] that Catholic priests should not use electronic devices when leading Mass... ‘Using electronic devices, you could easily confuse the sacred and the secular.’”
[2] Mary Ann Tolbert commentary on Mark in The New Interpreter’s Study Bible 2003, p.1812.
No comments:
Post a Comment