KINGS AND THEIR KINGDOMS

The Romans executed Jesus as a messianic claimant, as an enemy of the state, as a rebel. Josephus and Tacitus both wrote that he was crucified by order of Pontius Pilate.

In a world where Caesar is Lord, sin is legislated, resistance is criminalized, and dissent is demonized. The merger of political and religious power predates Pontius Pilate's and Joseph Caiaphas's conjugal dictatorship.

If we read our Bibles and pray everyday, we will grow, grow, grow in this realization: sinners are, more often than not, synonymous with the poor, oppressed, and marginalized in the Gospels. Who can afford the offerings in the temple? Who has the resources to bribe authorities? Who writes the law and for whose benefit?

Nothing has changed. The political and religious elites' culture of impunity continues to crush the poor underfoot.

Sunday's lection features a conversation between symbols of two completely opposite gospels: Rome's and God's; the Good News for the Rich and the Good News for the Poor. Both talk about kings and kingdoms, but totally opposite kings and kingdoms.

Tragically, so many among us confess "Jesus is Lord," but in word, thought, and deed, we side with Pilate's Lord. Our lust for power, prestige, and privilege, our envy for the powerful, prestigious, and privileged paint lives that scream, "Caesar is Lord".

*art, "What is Truth?", by Ge, N. N. (Nikolaĭ Nikolaevich), 1831-1894, available from the vanderbilt divinity library digital collection. 

THE CHURCH IS NOT A BUILDING...

Sunday's lection reminds us of Herod the Great's Temple that, according to Jesus, was built from the offerings of widows and other very poor people.

Jesus said, "Not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down!" And he was right.

We are uncomfortable with a Jesus who speaks of doom, destruction, and death. We do not wish to see Jesus brandishing a whip while driving out those who were selling and buying in the Temple, including the moneychangers. We do not want to acknowledge that Jesus can be angry--and violently angry, at that.

We are so used to the Jesus we have created in our image. We are so used to the huge cathedrals and grand buildings we have created to make us comfortable when we come together in his name. We have even come up with the phrase "Sunday best", air conditioning, and exclusive seating inside these walls we have built as imposing monuments of our faith in God. Remember Jesus’s words, "Not one stone will be left here upon another; all will be thrown down."

Friends, our comforts have made us forget that the church is not a building. It never was. It never will be. It has always been people: people who love; people who serve; people who offer their lives so that others may live, like Jesus did.

And when the church ceases to serve its purpose, we should not be surprised when Jesus himself tears it down.

*photo, The Western or "Wailing Wall" in the Old City of Jerusalem (taken last 9 August 2016). 

LIVING OFF THE BACKS OF THE POOR

We grew up hearing sermons on stewardship based on Sunday's lection from Mark 12 (which is also found in Luke 21). Jesus said, "This poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance but she, out of her poverty, has put in all that she had to live on.”

We grew up being taught to be cheerful givers, like the poor widow, and offer everything we have to live on to the Lord and the Lord's work. Not just our food, money, and house; even our mental and emotional health is given away for God's sake.

Thank God, most of us have outgrown these teachings. Now, we are learning to follow the One whose life and ministry was dedicated to widows, orphans, and strangers, the One who preached a Gospel for the Poor, the One who offered his life so that others may live.

Now, we are learning how many institutionalized structures and systems--religious or otherwise--rob people of even the barest that they have. Now, we realize that Jesus was actually denouncing the temple elite's unjust system of dispossessing the already dispossessed in the name of God. I think the incident at the temple was one of his ways of declaring, “Enough! This temple has become a den of thieves!”

Yet, many of our churches and our programs continue to thrive and live off of the backs of the poor and suffering.

Friends, don't forget this, ever: Jesus condemns the scribes who devour widows' houses. Moreover--if you read his precise words--Jesus does not tell us to "go and do" as the widow did.

*art, "The Widow's Mite," JESUS MAFA 1973 (available at vanderbilt divinity library digital archives). 

CHOOSE!

Sunday's Markan lection is also found in Matthew and Luke. Most historians think that Mark's is the original version. The Pharisees ask Jesus about the greatest commandment, possibly expecting him to quote from the Decalogue in Exodus. Jesus responds with the "Shema" from Deuteronomy.

Sunday's lection answers a question many among us don't want to hear. Because the Hebrew word "shema" means to hear, to do, to act.

What is the question? How do we love God? The answer we don't want to hear? By loving our neighbor.

Take note of the "this" (singular) in Jesus's exchange with the scribe (in the Markan version) and the lawyer (in the Lukan version). The scribe says to Jesus, "THIS is much more important..." Jesus says to the lawyer, "do THIS and you will live."

Loving God is loving our neighbor.

To love God is to feed the hungry, to offer drink to the thirsty, to clothe the naked, to visit the prisoners, to care for the sick, to welcome the stranger. To use the Bible as a land title to justify the displacement, dispossession, demonization, and destruction of Palestinians, for decades, is the complete opposite of loving God.

Don't forget that "loving" in loving our neighbor is "agape." Agape is not based on emotions. (That's "eros." ) Nor is it based on relations. (That's "filia.") It is and will always be based on decisions. Every moment of our lives, we decide for the other. We choose the least, the last, and the left out.

We choose to follow Christ, to love our neighbor, to serve the people!


*photograph: "I Choose...To Love My Neighbor" From the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA, 2015), available from the vanderbilt divinity library digital archives.

 

BARTIMAEUS

A distinct thread that flows through Mark's narrative is the failure of the named disciples to understand the ministry of Jesus and the discipleship it requires. This failure is most pronounced in chapters 8,9,10, and 16.

In 8,9,and 10 three times Jesus tells his disciples that he will be crucified and will be raised up. Three times his disciples do not believe him nor do they accept what he plans to do. Simon Peter actually rebukes him.

The male disciples fail Jesus first. The women disciples fail him next, in chapter 16. Don't forget that they went to the tomb expecting to anoint a dead body. No named disciples, male and female, believed Jesus in Mark. This is why the Gospel ends with women who are silent and afraid. Because the One they expected to find dead inside a locked tomb in Jerusalem was risen, in Galilee, and waiting for them! He was right all along!

In the Markan world of unbelief, we have Bartimaeus, a named blind beggar, who does believe and follows Jesus. Twice he declares that Jesus is the Messiah (Son of David). Twice he cries out, "Kyrie, eleison!" (Lord, have mercy). He calls Jesus, "My Teacher" and, after being healed, follows him.

Many times those of us who confess that we believe and follow Jesus ignore people on the wayside; people like Bartimaeus. Many times we tell them to shut up. Many times we pretend they are not there. Many times we turn our backs on them.

Many times they are actually the ones who do believe and follow Jesus. Because Jesus hears their cries when nobody else does.


*art, "Jesus cures the man born blind," JESUS MAFA, 1973 (from the vanderbilt divinity library digital archives).

**One can also argue that Bartimaeus (Son of Timaeus) refers to Plato's Timaeus which discusses true sight as discerning the perfect world of "forms" as eternal and separate from the physical world. Mark might have been arguing that that true sight actually comes from following the Son of David, the perfect in physical form.  

RANSOM

Many people use this Sunday's lection to support the idea that Jesus paid the price for our sins. God is holy and humanity is sinful (and has tainted the whole of creation). The only way to appease God's righteousness is for God's sinless Son to die a horrible death on the cross for our sins.

There are also those who believe that Satan has all of us kidnapped and God pays for our ransom with the life of God's Son, Jesus.

The Greek term used for ransom in the passage denotes payment to release prisoners or liberate slaves which resonates with the promise of freedom in the Exodus and Jubilee narratives. Unlike the world's other Lords and Masters, Mark's Messiah serves instead of being served. He is ready to be last instead of being first. He does not have a throne with James on his right and John on his left.

However, he is crucified with rebels: one on his right, another on his left. He is ready to be a ransom to set prisoners and slaves free. He offers his body and his blood so that the hungry can eat and the thirsty can drink.

Simply put, he is willing to offer his life so that others may live. He chose to give his life, instead of doing it because God told him to. And he challenges those who follow him to do likewise.

*image from "facts about the crucifixion of christ," learnreligionsdotcom.

SELL EVERYTHING YOU HAVE

Many rich people allegorize this Sunday's lection. For them "selling everything you have and giving all the proceeds to the poor" actually means something else. It is about putting God first in their lives. It is practicing "Christ above all". It means if you love God more than your money and you give regularly to charity, then it is okay to be rich. There are those who say it is not directed to the rich but to the super rich. My favorite is the interpretation that the message is exclusively for the rich young man in the passage. No one else's.

Do you know why there is a Second Coming?

Because we--those of us who call ourselves Christian whose cupboards are filled and do not need to pray "give us today our daily bread"--have failed miserably to do what Jesus commanded us during his First Coming. We have removed the "Poor" from the "Gospel to the Poor" that we are supposed to proclaim. We have not brought down the powerful from their thrones nor have we sent away the rich empty. Instead, we have embraced power, profit, and privilege. We have turned our backs on the One who called us to be salt, seed, and light and have, instead, connived with empire in order to rule the world.

We have failed to feed the hungry, to offer drink to the thirsty, to clothe the naked, to care for the sick, to visit the prisoners, and to welcome the stranger. We have forgotten that we are each other's keepers. We have been afraid to storm the halls of power to tell the rich and the super rich to sell everything they have and give all the proceeds to the poor because we have been complicit in legitimizing the systems, structures, and theologies that keep the rich richer and the poor miserable.

We have forgotten that the Earth is not inherited, but borrowed from our children--and when we are gone, these little ones who are first in the kingdom of heaven, will be the first to take the brunt of our indifference.

In fact, with ever stronger typhoons and ever hotter heat waves worldwide every year, they are taking the brunt of our indifference RIGHT NOW.

We have also ignored Jesus’s judgment in the second half of Sunday's lection: "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."


*sculpture, "Educating the Rich on the Globe" by Tom Otterness (from the vanderbilt divinity library digital archives).

JESUS ON DIVORCE

 

In many dominator societies, then and now, marriage provides an economic safety net for women. Divorced women could remarry to allow them the safety net marriage provided. Widows could also remarry for the same reason, levirate marriages being the best example.

In Sunday's lection from Mark 10, Jesus was asked about divorce by some married Pharisees who already knew the answer. They actually knew two answers to their question. (Yes to divorce because of the wife's adultery, and yes to divorce because of the wife's adultery and other things the husband finds objectionable about her.) Deuteronomy 24, which the Pharisees were alluding to, specifies that only husbands can divorce their wives.

Jesus, in a later conversation with the disciples, says wives can choose to divorce their husbands.

Choices play a primary role in this pericope. Divorce is a choice. The option started with Moses. Marriage is a choice, and is arguably the better choice for Jesus since this option has God's blessing. Unfortunately, many times, only the men get to choose either.

In the Philippines, there is still no option to choose divorce because men in power decide which laws to pass. And they choose not to pass any law on divorce. They make the options that do exist-- annulment and legal separation-- costly and lengthy. They cover their ears to the cries of abused spouses-- especially wives-- and make a big show of using the law to protect the integrity of marriage and family. They forget that God knows how abusive spouses are, themselves breaking apart what God made one.

I am sure that there are a lot of people who would disagree with Jesus's reasoning on this particular matter. I do. And it's perfectly okay. In Mark 12, a group of married Saduccees come to Jesus with a question about a woman who had to be married to seven husbands one after the other. I love Jesus's response in that episode.

In the end, no one, especially a man, has the right to take away a woman's autonomy and freedom to choose.

*art, "Jesus on Divorce, Remarriage, and Adultery," (Marg Mowczko).

ENTERING THE KINGDOM MAIMED, LAME, OR ONE-EYED

Part of Sunday's lection has been used to scare children. Many grew up being told to cut off or pluck out body parts that cause them to sin. For a lot of young people, this meant at least three things: don't look at what will cause you to sin; don't touch what will cause you to sin; and don't go anywhere that will cause you to sin.

Three things. First, the passage is not for children. Second, there is no word for "sin" in the passage. Modern translations use "stumble" or "stumbling block". Better alternatives would be "snare" or "trap." Third, I believe the passage is addressed to a specific group of people: predators.

The first section of the passage is Jesus's judgment directed to those who take advantage of children, those who set snares and traps to exploit the little ones in God's kingdom, those who use, abuse, and reuse the anawim. Compared to the judgment coming to them, it would be better for them if great millstones were hung around their necks and they were thrown into the sea.

Never, ever, forget: aside from pastors who pray, there are also pastors who prey.

The second portion of the passage is a challenge directed to those who might still be saved from being thrown into the sea or being thrown into Gehenna: where worms never die and the fire is never quenched. There is still hope as as long as they are prepared to enter life in the Kingdom of God maimed, lame, or one-eyed.

Many among us are not comfortable with an angry Jesus. Maybe we have been following the wrong Jesus.


*art, "The Angry Christ" (Alfonso Ossorio, 1916-1990).
+Ancient traditions say that children were offered as burnt sacrifices at Gehenna but recent archeological studies argue that it was used as a crematorium.

CHILDREN AND JESUS

Sunday’s lection is about welcoming children. To welcome a child is to welcome Jesus. Do we really welcome children?

25,000 children, aged 5 and younger, die every day from hunger. 10,000 die daily from diarrhea. Close to a billion people, mostly girls, cannot read or write. Up to 800,000 million women, mostly young girls, spend up to 20 hours a day looking for safe water. We all know the antidote for hunger. It’s food. The antidote for diarrhea? Safe water.

The United Nations and related organizations tell us that we need 666 billion dollars to address hunger, poverty, basic education, health care, food security, water, and sanitation worldwide. Tragically, the world would rather spend 2,400 billion dollars, just for 2023, on weapons of mass destruction than welcome children.

My dear friends, we need to repent. We have failed miserably. We need to ask God for forgiveness. We have forgotten what welcoming Jesus requires. We need to welcome widows, orphans, and strangers. We need to welcome those whose only hope is God. We need to welcome the nobodies. We need to welcome the unwelcomed.

We need to welcome children.

Because only then do we get to welcome Jesus.

*art, "Jesus welcomes the Children" (JESUS MAFA 1973, Cameroon), from the vanderbilt divinity library art collection. 

SATAN CARES FOR YOU

This week, I want us to imagine Satan. Many among us grew up with images of and ideas about Satan that do not come from the Bible. Pop Culture? Yes. Scripture? No.

In the book of Job, Satan is with other heavenly beings in the presence of God. In the book of Zechariah, there is a vision of God with Satan to God's right. In Mark, Jesus was in the wilderness for 40 days and nights. He was not alone--he was with Satan. In 1 Chronicles 21, the anger of the LORD is described as Satan. In Numbers 22, the use of the Hebrew term "satan" actually means blocking one's way forward.

In Sunday's lection, Jesus calls Peter, Satan. Why? This is Peter, the leader of the disciples. Peter, whose house served as Jesus's home. Peter, the Rock. Satan? Why?

My friends, never, ever, forget this. Satan does not have horns, a tail, and a pitchfork. Many times in our lives, the adversary is not the enemy. Many times, the one who opposes our decision, our mission, our advocacy is a loved one. Family. Friends. Even a best friend. Like Peter.

Why, you ask? Because they love us. Because they think we are making a mistake. Because they want what they believe is best for our well-being. Because they do not want us to undergo great suffering, harassment, or red-tagging. Because they do not want us to be killed.

They behave like Peter.
 

*art, "Get Thee Behind Me Satan" by James Tissot (1836-1902), from the Vanderbilt Divinity Library digital archives.

IN MEMORIAM: DANIEL PATTE

The world of Biblical Studies will always identify Daniel Patte with Structural Exegesis, Scripture Criticism, and SEMEIA. Those of us who had the privilege of working with him know that he was a brilliant scholar, a prolific author, a highly-skilled editor, and an excellent professor. And he especially loved the books of Matthew and Romans. 

But Daniel was more than a teacher, a mentor, and a friend to me (and a lot of other students at Vanderbilt and elsewhere), he was also my PhD adviser. I served as his TA (for his NT Themes classes), his RA (when he was General Editor of SEMEIA), and webmaster (for the Religious Studies Department which he chaired).

Our family spent a lot of time at Daniel and Aline's home. The first meal we ever had when we arrived in Nashville was at the Pattes. Our last meal, five years later, as well. 

The couple were "parents" to me and Grace, and "grandparents" to our sons, Lukas and Ian. Time spent with them were precious moments. Lukas's first experience with a vintage rotary dial telephone was at the Pattes. We have baby pictures of Ian being carried by "Lolo" Daniel. (Ian, a few years ago, got to read his Lolo's book on Matthew and Structural Criticism.)

Three of my best students at UTS are structural exegetes. Daniel would be proud of them. 

Daniel was one of the only two people (the other being Grace) who believed, decades ago, that "Reading the Bible inside a Jeepney" will work as a hermeneutical method. 

===

Rest in peace, my dear friend. You were God's gift to so many people. Thank you for believing in me. I will see you in the morning!

#danielpatte

THE LITTLE BITCH WHO TAUGHT JESUS A LESSON

 

Sunday's lection from Mark has a Syro-Phoenician (a Canaanite in Matthew) who comes to Jesus for help. Her little daughter was sick. She begged Jesus for healing. She was initially ignored. She was even treated like a dog (the Greek could be translated "little bitch"). Yet she persevered. And she persisted. And because she persevered, because she persisted, she got what she came for: her child was healed.

Robert Warrior, whose “Canaanites, Cowboys, and Indians” turned Hebrew Bible scholarship on its ear, notes that in the narrative, the “little bitch” does not become a follower of Jesus. She seeks him out because he has something she needs. She receives what she came for and walks away never to be mentioned again. She changes Jesus. Maybe she went back to her people and fought against the colonizing Romans in her own way with her own gods. The importance of her story is not whether she followed Jesus but that, without her, Jesus would have remained a narrow-minded bigot who viewed Indigenous People as dogs.

The little bitch who taught Jesus a lesson was alone in the text. But in front of the text, she is not. She is Filipina. She is Palestinian. She is Mexican. She is IP. She is Legion. She is transgressing borders. She is reclaiming what is hers. And she is fighting for her children’s lives and resisting empire her own way with her own gods.

And she continues to teach us.

**Prof. Daniel Patte, who passed away last September 2, urged me do the chapter on the "Little Bitch" in the 2003 book, The Gospel of Matthew: A Contextual Introduction for Group Study, we co-wrote with Justin Ukpong and Monya Stubbs.

*art, "The Canaanite Woman asks for healing for her daughter" by Bazzi Rahib, Ilyas Basim Khuri (from the vanderbilt divinity library digital archives).