Gleanings From the Text
Psalm 50:1-6
The Larger Picture:
This six-verse pericope introduces a prophetic psalm of judgment (see Mays), whose later verses lay out specific charges against God’s chosen people. Psalm 50 goes beyond rebuke and the threat of punishment, directing the faithful to reject mechanical worship and corrupt behavior and to offer sincere thanksgiving and praise for their creator. In this context, it has been pointed out that Psalm 51’s prayer for cleansing and pardon serves as an appropriate confession of sin and commitment to reform along the lines mapped out in Psalm 50 (see Schaefer).
Some Details:
Ecological setting: God calls the entire natural world to witness in the case. The scope of creation’s witness extends from sunrise to sunset (v.1) and from the height of the heavens down to the earth (v.4). Later in the psalm (vv. 10-12), it is pointed out that God owns all of creation, and does not need human sacrifice.
God is not an outsider: It is from within this natural context that God’s glory shines forth in Zion (v. 2) (see “God’s Grandeur,” Gerard Manley Hopkins, http://www.bartleby.com/122/7.html). God uses the forces of nature (devouring fire, whirling tempest) not only to demonstrate power but also to communicate (does not keep silent) (v.3). It even appears that God requires this natural context “that he may judge” God’s people (v.4). It is the heavens that “declare [God’s] righteousness” – witnessing to God’s appropriate role as judge (v.6)
God’s judgment is intimate: The verb translated as “summons” in v.1 of the NRSV accurately reflects the psalm’s legal setting, but that same verb is more commonly translated simply as “calls to,” as in v.4. The God-that-summons calls out personally, “Gather to me my faithful ones, who made a covenant with me…” (v. 5) Further, the verb translated “judge” in v. 4 may carry the connotation of “pleading a case” in behalf of someone (see BDB). If a courtroom scene is depicted by Psalm 50, it is a family council where the judge knows everyone and prefers reformed behavior to vengeful punishment.
Food for Thought
Lectionary readings consistently snip out the hard words of the psalms, leaving only words of praise. There is nothing wrong with praise! However, Psalm 50 demonstrates that God requires worshipers to struggle with the significance of their worship and to move away from mechanically tossed-off prayer, praise, and thanksgiving. By expurgating the hard facts laid out in later verses of Psalm 50, could the lectionary actually contribute to the very type of behavior against which we are being warned?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Years ago, a new second-career student came to my office to discuss plans for life at seminary. The student remarked that he had already completed a successful career, and was now able to “give something back to God.” At the time, I thought of the parable of the rich young ruler, and wondered if the student knew exactly how much he might need to give up. Today’s work with Psalm 50 brings that past conversation to mind yet again. We have many high achievers at Union-PSCE, and it is a delight to see their varied gifts being polished to serve the church. At the same time, Psalm 50 offers a strong and helpful reminder that each of us owes everything – property, family, personal attributes, the very ground we stand on – to God. We have nothing of our own to give to God – except our gratitude. The astonishing good news is that gratitude is exactly what God has always wanted.
Works Referenced
Brown, Driver, Briggs, Gesenius, The New Hebrew and English Lexicon, 1979. p. 192a.
Mays, James L., Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching: Psalms, John Knox Press, 1994. p. 194
Schaefer, Konrad, Berit Olam Studies in Hebrew Narrative & Poetry: Psalms, The Liturgical Press, 2001. p. 128.
Biographical Information
The registrar of Union-PSCE, Barrows earned her Masters of Divinity degree from the Richmond campus. She works closely with the student body, helping individual students to select their classes and also participating in a wide range of activities including leading chapel worship. Barrows is originally from Salem, Oregon.
Read more!
Friday, January 2, 2009
Feb. 15, 2009 - 2 Kings 5:1-14 - Catherine Devins
Gleanings from the Text
2 Kings 5:1-14
2 Kings 2-8 offers a series of folktales that describe miracles of nurture and restoration that provide evidence of Elisha’s reputation and authority as prophet of God, successor to Elijah. Chapter 5 reports two miracle stories that work together as a unit. The first story (2 Kings 5:1-14) describes the healing of a foreigner from leprosy. The sequel or second miracle story (vv.15-27) has a twist on the first story with a greedy Israelite who is given leprosy.
1. Introduction (vv.1-5)
• Naaman is a foreigner, chief military commander of the Aramean army and conqueror of the Israelite army. Tradition suggests that Naaman is the “certain man” who shot the arrow that killed Israel’s King Ahab (2 Chronicles 18:33-34) (see Seow).
• Leprosy described a broad range of skin diseases. Naaman did not likely have the leprosy we refer to as Hansen’s disease, but undoubtedly it was painful, disfiguring or had negative social stigma.
• Hope for salvation comes from a captured, Israelite servant girl who suggests that Naaman could be cured of disease by the prophet from her homeland.
• Naaman prepares an enormously ostentatious gift of persuasion for the healer prophet.
2. First Obstacle (vv.6-8)
• The hapless King of Israel misunderstands the diplomatic letter thinking that he, the King, must perform the miracle of healing: only God has power over life and death.
• Elisha responds: Send Naaman to me that he might know there is a prophet in Israel (vv.7-8).
3. Second Obstacle (vv.9-12)
• Namaan takes his entourage to Elisha. Expecting personalized attention, Naaman is indignant when Elisha dispatches a messenger to tell Naaman to wash seven times in the Jordan.
• Elisha’s instructions are for ritual cleansing (Lev. 13-14)—not healing. Naaman expects more ceremony or challenge. Naaman’s ego is wounded (see Seow).
• National pride is also at stake. He could just as easily have jumped into a clean river in Damascus.
4. Resolution (vv.13-14)
• Naaman’s servants have a different interpretation of Elisha’s command to “wash and be clean.” To Namman’s credit he again listens to the advice of servants.
• Without really understanding, Namaan submits to a simple routine task and washes seven times in the Jordan. Miraculously his flesh is restored to that of a young boy!
Food for Thought
• This miracle story demonstrates the healing power and universality of the Sovereign God of all. Naaman was victorious in battle against Israel (1 Kings 22:29-36) which the Israelites explain as the will of the Lord (see Seow). God’s offer of salvation extends outside the chosen people. Jesus uses this story to highlight the inclusiveness of his ministry to Gentiles (Luke 4:27).
• Elisha’s command and promise require Naaman’s obedience for his salvation to occur. In complying, Naaman learns that God’s salvation comes through the unexpected when we submit to God’s plan, not ours. It was not the Jordan’s miracle properties, but Naaman’s obedience to the prophet’s command and promise that leads to cure (see Fretheim).
• God mediates salvation in unexpected ways—through lowly servants and simple acts, and is symbolized in a baptism.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story contains all the elements of good movie entertainment: vivid characters, complex plot, comedy, tension, resolution and message. As I envisioned how the script might be written for the big screen, a colorful cast of characters for the various roles came to mind:
First, cast in the role of Naaman the mighty warrior, is Kelsey Grammar from TV’s “Fraser.” His Dr. Crane character has the right blend of arrogance, pomp and yet humility when his vast ego is inevitably deflated. The goofy, hapless king of Israel, running around ranting and tearing his clothes must be played by the spastic over the top characterization of Jim Carey. Keeping the emphasis on the Word and not the messenger, Elisha the prophet is an authoritative voice-over telling the King to send Naaman to him. In his best, booming, “This is CNN” voice, my pick is James Earl Jones. Finally, we need Radar O’Reilly of "M*A*S*H" fame in the role of Naaman’s servant who points out the simple, obvious truth and anticipates what his master cannot.
Works Referenced
The HarperCollins Bible Commentary. James L. Mays, et al. editors, (HarperCollins Publishers, 1988) p. 296.
Terrance Fretheim, First and Second Kings, (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 1999) p. 153.
Choon-Leong Seow, “1 and 2 Kings.” The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. III. Leander Keck, et al. editors. (Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1998) p. 193. Read more!
2 Kings 5:1-14
2 Kings 2-8 offers a series of folktales that describe miracles of nurture and restoration that provide evidence of Elisha’s reputation and authority as prophet of God, successor to Elijah. Chapter 5 reports two miracle stories that work together as a unit. The first story (2 Kings 5:1-14) describes the healing of a foreigner from leprosy. The sequel or second miracle story (vv.15-27) has a twist on the first story with a greedy Israelite who is given leprosy.
1. Introduction (vv.1-5)
• Naaman is a foreigner, chief military commander of the Aramean army and conqueror of the Israelite army. Tradition suggests that Naaman is the “certain man” who shot the arrow that killed Israel’s King Ahab (2 Chronicles 18:33-34) (see Seow).
• Leprosy described a broad range of skin diseases. Naaman did not likely have the leprosy we refer to as Hansen’s disease, but undoubtedly it was painful, disfiguring or had negative social stigma.
• Hope for salvation comes from a captured, Israelite servant girl who suggests that Naaman could be cured of disease by the prophet from her homeland.
• Naaman prepares an enormously ostentatious gift of persuasion for the healer prophet.
2. First Obstacle (vv.6-8)
• The hapless King of Israel misunderstands the diplomatic letter thinking that he, the King, must perform the miracle of healing: only God has power over life and death.
• Elisha responds: Send Naaman to me that he might know there is a prophet in Israel (vv.7-8).
3. Second Obstacle (vv.9-12)
• Namaan takes his entourage to Elisha. Expecting personalized attention, Naaman is indignant when Elisha dispatches a messenger to tell Naaman to wash seven times in the Jordan.
• Elisha’s instructions are for ritual cleansing (Lev. 13-14)—not healing. Naaman expects more ceremony or challenge. Naaman’s ego is wounded (see Seow).
• National pride is also at stake. He could just as easily have jumped into a clean river in Damascus.
4. Resolution (vv.13-14)
• Naaman’s servants have a different interpretation of Elisha’s command to “wash and be clean.” To Namman’s credit he again listens to the advice of servants.
• Without really understanding, Namaan submits to a simple routine task and washes seven times in the Jordan. Miraculously his flesh is restored to that of a young boy!
Food for Thought
• This miracle story demonstrates the healing power and universality of the Sovereign God of all. Naaman was victorious in battle against Israel (1 Kings 22:29-36) which the Israelites explain as the will of the Lord (see Seow). God’s offer of salvation extends outside the chosen people. Jesus uses this story to highlight the inclusiveness of his ministry to Gentiles (Luke 4:27).
• Elisha’s command and promise require Naaman’s obedience for his salvation to occur. In complying, Naaman learns that God’s salvation comes through the unexpected when we submit to God’s plan, not ours. It was not the Jordan’s miracle properties, but Naaman’s obedience to the prophet’s command and promise that leads to cure (see Fretheim).
• God mediates salvation in unexpected ways—through lowly servants and simple acts, and is symbolized in a baptism.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
This story contains all the elements of good movie entertainment: vivid characters, complex plot, comedy, tension, resolution and message. As I envisioned how the script might be written for the big screen, a colorful cast of characters for the various roles came to mind:
First, cast in the role of Naaman the mighty warrior, is Kelsey Grammar from TV’s “Fraser.” His Dr. Crane character has the right blend of arrogance, pomp and yet humility when his vast ego is inevitably deflated. The goofy, hapless king of Israel, running around ranting and tearing his clothes must be played by the spastic over the top characterization of Jim Carey. Keeping the emphasis on the Word and not the messenger, Elisha the prophet is an authoritative voice-over telling the King to send Naaman to him. In his best, booming, “This is CNN” voice, my pick is James Earl Jones. Finally, we need Radar O’Reilly of "M*A*S*H" fame in the role of Naaman’s servant who points out the simple, obvious truth and anticipates what his master cannot.
Works Referenced
The HarperCollins Bible Commentary. James L. Mays, et al. editors, (HarperCollins Publishers, 1988) p. 296.
Terrance Fretheim, First and Second Kings, (Louisville, Westminster John Knox Press, 1999) p. 153.
Choon-Leong Seow, “1 and 2 Kings.” The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. III. Leander Keck, et al. editors. (Nashville, Abingdon Press, 1998) p. 193. Read more!
Feb. 8, 2009 - 1 Corinthians 9:16-23 - Chris Burton
Gleanings From The Text
1 Corinthians 9:16-23
In this passage, Paul emphasizes responsibility over prestige. He performs a tightrope act with his rhetoric; blending sacrifice with reward and freedom with constraint, in order to optimize his ability to share the gospel. Throughout the text, he is obliged to proclaim the gospel without giving in to boasting. In verse seventeen, Paul brings the notion of “calling” into direct conflict with his volition (see Conzelmann). He notes the ability to receive a reward through one’s volition, yet verse sixteen shows that it is a calling (obligation) that motivates him to proclaim the gospel rather than himself. Paul does not take this fork in the road as an opportunity to condemn rewards; rather he offers a working definition.
“What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel.” (1 Cor. 9:18) Through this I invite you to consider Paul’s notion that the reward and the call are not mutually exclusive. A reward is found in proclaiming the gospel and this reward is the ability to…proclaim the gospel!
There is a freedom in Paul’s notion of becoming “all things to all people,” (1 Cor. 9:22) that is fostered through the compassion this stance connotes. It promotes versatility within the “called” individual and can generate the necessary amount of empathy that strengthens community.
Food For Thought
These qualities—which may get you labeled a populist in political circles—empower us to meet people where they are. Too often we do not help people with their own problems but offer advice that is too specific to our own plights. Perhaps you know someone who has great potential but is reluctant to follow opportunities because they feel unprepared or unworthy. Or people have developed an impervious image of you and consequently confessed that they “could never do what you do.” What if we were to operate under a duality that allows us to share our experiences in a manner that leads people into their strengths? My struggles with fear may lead you to overcome your anger but I cannot solely focus on fear when you are oppressed by anger. This empathy and understanding is possible when we are operating through obligation and not a personal search for reward. If I am concerned with showing you how good I am and the pursuit of my reward, how can I meet you in your circumstance? Won’t the gospel be impeded by my one-man show?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Confessedly, my argument is founded upon a belief that proclaiming the gospel manifests itself in the physical realm through empowering people. Simply put, I believe acts of kindness are a suitable conduit for gospel proclamation. It saddens me that our world consistently generates mistrust amongst people. When an act of kindness is performed, people feel obliged to “pay you back” rather than “pay it forward.” Or when asked to perform an act of kindness, people often ask, “What’s in it for me?” This climate has led agents of social gospels to meet individualism halfway and link pursuits of happiness to greater causes. An example of this is a campaign encouraging consumers to buy particular items in order to support the fight against HIV/AIDS. For a while I admired this effort and considered it an ingenious way of forming a symbiotic relationship between the consumer and the cause. (Feel good and do good!) On World Aids Day, I came across a website that blasted this effort and proclaimed, “Shopping is not a solution. Buy (less). Give More.” (see www.buylesscrap.org) Does goodwill lose its merit if one receives something in return? If we are led to feel convicted about feeling good while doing good; should the act of spreading the gospel be purely sacrificial?
I suppose this amalgamation of social gospel and consumerism can lead people to follow their will and give fodder for boasting. I can feel good about myself if my restaurant meal helps fight childhood cancer. My nose may turn up as other coffee drinkers fail to share my passion for “fair-trade” java. Still, I am persuaded that Paul’s message should challenge the saturation of individualistic striving (both the callous and the self-righteous blends). Our challenge to proclaim the gospel equips us with a cohesive force that says, “I am because we are.” (see Blount) I believe it is through a commitment to community that we receive our reward of further opportunities to give.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount, ed., True To Our Native Land An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2007), 291.
Hans Conzelmann, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, ed. George W. MacRae, S.J. (Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1975), 158.
Judith L. Kovacs, ed., 1 Corinthians Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 155.
Biographical Information
After graduating from Davidson College, Burton was offered a scholarship to attend Union-PSCE and is already active on campus as a first year student. Before coming to Richmond, he taught in Brooklyn, New York. Burton hails from East Orange, New Jersey. Read more!
1 Corinthians 9:16-23
In this passage, Paul emphasizes responsibility over prestige. He performs a tightrope act with his rhetoric; blending sacrifice with reward and freedom with constraint, in order to optimize his ability to share the gospel. Throughout the text, he is obliged to proclaim the gospel without giving in to boasting. In verse seventeen, Paul brings the notion of “calling” into direct conflict with his volition (see Conzelmann). He notes the ability to receive a reward through one’s volition, yet verse sixteen shows that it is a calling (obligation) that motivates him to proclaim the gospel rather than himself. Paul does not take this fork in the road as an opportunity to condemn rewards; rather he offers a working definition.
“What then is my reward? Just this: that in my proclamation I may make the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my rights in the gospel.” (1 Cor. 9:18) Through this I invite you to consider Paul’s notion that the reward and the call are not mutually exclusive. A reward is found in proclaiming the gospel and this reward is the ability to…proclaim the gospel!
There is a freedom in Paul’s notion of becoming “all things to all people,” (1 Cor. 9:22) that is fostered through the compassion this stance connotes. It promotes versatility within the “called” individual and can generate the necessary amount of empathy that strengthens community.
Food For Thought
These qualities—which may get you labeled a populist in political circles—empower us to meet people where they are. Too often we do not help people with their own problems but offer advice that is too specific to our own plights. Perhaps you know someone who has great potential but is reluctant to follow opportunities because they feel unprepared or unworthy. Or people have developed an impervious image of you and consequently confessed that they “could never do what you do.” What if we were to operate under a duality that allows us to share our experiences in a manner that leads people into their strengths? My struggles with fear may lead you to overcome your anger but I cannot solely focus on fear when you are oppressed by anger. This empathy and understanding is possible when we are operating through obligation and not a personal search for reward. If I am concerned with showing you how good I am and the pursuit of my reward, how can I meet you in your circumstance? Won’t the gospel be impeded by my one-man show?
Sink Your Teeth Into This
Confessedly, my argument is founded upon a belief that proclaiming the gospel manifests itself in the physical realm through empowering people. Simply put, I believe acts of kindness are a suitable conduit for gospel proclamation. It saddens me that our world consistently generates mistrust amongst people. When an act of kindness is performed, people feel obliged to “pay you back” rather than “pay it forward.” Or when asked to perform an act of kindness, people often ask, “What’s in it for me?” This climate has led agents of social gospels to meet individualism halfway and link pursuits of happiness to greater causes. An example of this is a campaign encouraging consumers to buy particular items in order to support the fight against HIV/AIDS. For a while I admired this effort and considered it an ingenious way of forming a symbiotic relationship between the consumer and the cause. (Feel good and do good!) On World Aids Day, I came across a website that blasted this effort and proclaimed, “Shopping is not a solution. Buy (less). Give More.” (see www.buylesscrap.org) Does goodwill lose its merit if one receives something in return? If we are led to feel convicted about feeling good while doing good; should the act of spreading the gospel be purely sacrificial?
I suppose this amalgamation of social gospel and consumerism can lead people to follow their will and give fodder for boasting. I can feel good about myself if my restaurant meal helps fight childhood cancer. My nose may turn up as other coffee drinkers fail to share my passion for “fair-trade” java. Still, I am persuaded that Paul’s message should challenge the saturation of individualistic striving (both the callous and the self-righteous blends). Our challenge to proclaim the gospel equips us with a cohesive force that says, “I am because we are.” (see Blount) I believe it is through a commitment to community that we receive our reward of further opportunities to give.
Works Referenced
Brian K. Blount, ed., True To Our Native Land An African American New Testament Commentary (Minneapolis, Fortress Press, 2007), 291.
Hans Conzelmann, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians, ed. George W. MacRae, S.J. (Philadelphia, Fortress Press, 1975), 158.
Judith L. Kovacs, ed., 1 Corinthians Interpreted by Early Christian Commentators (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2005), 155.
Biographical Information
After graduating from Davidson College, Burton was offered a scholarship to attend Union-PSCE and is already active on campus as a first year student. Before coming to Richmond, he taught in Brooklyn, New York. Burton hails from East Orange, New Jersey. Read more!
Feb. 1, 2009 - Mark 1:21-28 - Beverly Zink-Sawyer
Gleanings From the Text
Mark 1:21-28
Jesus had barely just begun. He had been baptized by John, tempted by Satan, and joined by the first disciples. He had hardly said or done anything at this point in Mark’s Gospel before he found himself in the midst of conflict. And what an unexpected place for that first conflict to occur: in the synagogue on the Sabbath Day.
Jesus had arrived in Capernaum and entered the synagogue to worship and teach—an agenda no different from that of any faithful Jewish scholar. But as becomes obvious very quickly in the Gospels, Jesus did not have to say or do much to find himself in the middle of a confrontation.
This opening confrontation in Mark’s Gospel was prompted by what the NRSV translates as an “unclean spirit.” The unclean spirit, sometimes referred to as a demon, inhabited a worshipper in the synagogue, making the juxtaposition of an unclean spirit with the holiest of places even more startling and offensive. The demon speaks through the man to confront Jesus, in the process not only questioning Jesus (“What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth?”) but also identifying him (“I know who you are, the Holy One of God”). When Jesus “rebukes” the demon, the demon is expelled from the man with convulsions and cries.
The final scene is one of amazement on the part of the bystanders, the man’s fellow worshippers in the synagogue. They, too, then recognize Jesus’ uniqueness: that he teaches something new imbued with authority. At that point, Jesus’ ministry becomes public and the object of speculation and testing that would persist to his death.
This text is sometimes regarded as a miracle story, but the real subject of the text, as Lamar Williamson notes, is not the miracle but “Jesus’ authority in word and deed” (Mark—Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, 49). The “new teaching” of Jesus is evident from the opening of the pericope (v. 22) to its close (v. 27). The exorcism is a demonstration of Jesus’ power, but that power issues from his word.
Food for Thought
Several dimensions of this text offer rich homiletical “food for thought.” The opening verse indicates the primacy of Sabbath practice for Jesus. The Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John all include a synagogue event early in Jesus’ life and ministry. According to this text, the synagogue on the Sabbath is the place where Jesus reveals his radical new teaching and his authority from God. This should remind us of the primacy and the efficacy of worship for us as those who seek to know and follow Jesus.
Another dimension of the text is the uniqueness of Jesus’ teaching. The preacher might explore more precisely what that unique teaching looked like for those who heard that teaching first-hand and what that teaching looks like for us today. How does Jesus’ unique teaching shape our faith and work in our present world?
Jesus’ unique teaching as portrayed in this text issues from the authority of his word, or, more precisely, the word of God proclaimed through him, authority that stands in contrast to the authority of the scribes, the biblical authorities of the day. There is a word of caution here even for the church today, lest we put too much faith in the human teachings of the church and its leaders. “God alone is Lord of the conscience,” as one of our Presbyterian principles declares. God’s message to us as individuals, while perhaps confirmed or interpreted by the church, is ultimately a word from God to our own minds and hearts.
Of course, there are a couple of challenges for the contemporary preacher of this text. One is the demon possession that prompts the incident. While such a literal understanding of the work of evil spirits may seem anachronistic to modern listeners, we all can attest to the presence and persistence of evil in our world in various guises. The good news in this text, however, is that Jesus demonstrated his power to overcome the forces of evil wherever we may encounter them.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
One does not have to look far to find examples of the power of Jesus’ word set loose in our fearful and powerless world. Naming places, people, and situations that have been healed by the power of Jesus’ word would clearly convey the message of this text. I think of the wonderful words of Martin Luther’s great hymn, “A Mighty Fortress,” in conjunction with this text: “one little word” shall “fell” all the evil that threatens “to undo us.” That “word” is the Word of God in Jesus Christ, the identified Holy One, who speaks with the power and authority of God. Who else, then do we need on our side?
Biographical Information
Zink-Sawyer, the Samuel W. Newell, Jr. Professor of Preaching and Worship at Union-PSCE Richmond, focuses on the interaction of homiletics and American religious history with particular attention to women’s preaching. An ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), she served churches in Pennsylvania and Tennessee for 15 years and has served on committees at the presbytery and synod levels. She is editor of the Abingdon Women’s Preaching Annual and author of From Preachers to Suffragists: Women’s Rights and Religious Conviction in the Lives of Three Nineteenth-Century American Clergywomen. She was a Lilly Faculty Fellow of the Association of Theological Schools for 2000–2001. Read more!
Mark 1:21-28
Jesus had barely just begun. He had been baptized by John, tempted by Satan, and joined by the first disciples. He had hardly said or done anything at this point in Mark’s Gospel before he found himself in the midst of conflict. And what an unexpected place for that first conflict to occur: in the synagogue on the Sabbath Day.
Jesus had arrived in Capernaum and entered the synagogue to worship and teach—an agenda no different from that of any faithful Jewish scholar. But as becomes obvious very quickly in the Gospels, Jesus did not have to say or do much to find himself in the middle of a confrontation.
This opening confrontation in Mark’s Gospel was prompted by what the NRSV translates as an “unclean spirit.” The unclean spirit, sometimes referred to as a demon, inhabited a worshipper in the synagogue, making the juxtaposition of an unclean spirit with the holiest of places even more startling and offensive. The demon speaks through the man to confront Jesus, in the process not only questioning Jesus (“What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth?”) but also identifying him (“I know who you are, the Holy One of God”). When Jesus “rebukes” the demon, the demon is expelled from the man with convulsions and cries.
The final scene is one of amazement on the part of the bystanders, the man’s fellow worshippers in the synagogue. They, too, then recognize Jesus’ uniqueness: that he teaches something new imbued with authority. At that point, Jesus’ ministry becomes public and the object of speculation and testing that would persist to his death.
This text is sometimes regarded as a miracle story, but the real subject of the text, as Lamar Williamson notes, is not the miracle but “Jesus’ authority in word and deed” (Mark—Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching, 49). The “new teaching” of Jesus is evident from the opening of the pericope (v. 22) to its close (v. 27). The exorcism is a demonstration of Jesus’ power, but that power issues from his word.
Food for Thought
Several dimensions of this text offer rich homiletical “food for thought.” The opening verse indicates the primacy of Sabbath practice for Jesus. The Gospels of Mark, Luke, and John all include a synagogue event early in Jesus’ life and ministry. According to this text, the synagogue on the Sabbath is the place where Jesus reveals his radical new teaching and his authority from God. This should remind us of the primacy and the efficacy of worship for us as those who seek to know and follow Jesus.
Another dimension of the text is the uniqueness of Jesus’ teaching. The preacher might explore more precisely what that unique teaching looked like for those who heard that teaching first-hand and what that teaching looks like for us today. How does Jesus’ unique teaching shape our faith and work in our present world?
Jesus’ unique teaching as portrayed in this text issues from the authority of his word, or, more precisely, the word of God proclaimed through him, authority that stands in contrast to the authority of the scribes, the biblical authorities of the day. There is a word of caution here even for the church today, lest we put too much faith in the human teachings of the church and its leaders. “God alone is Lord of the conscience,” as one of our Presbyterian principles declares. God’s message to us as individuals, while perhaps confirmed or interpreted by the church, is ultimately a word from God to our own minds and hearts.
Of course, there are a couple of challenges for the contemporary preacher of this text. One is the demon possession that prompts the incident. While such a literal understanding of the work of evil spirits may seem anachronistic to modern listeners, we all can attest to the presence and persistence of evil in our world in various guises. The good news in this text, however, is that Jesus demonstrated his power to overcome the forces of evil wherever we may encounter them.
Sink Your Teeth Into This
One does not have to look far to find examples of the power of Jesus’ word set loose in our fearful and powerless world. Naming places, people, and situations that have been healed by the power of Jesus’ word would clearly convey the message of this text. I think of the wonderful words of Martin Luther’s great hymn, “A Mighty Fortress,” in conjunction with this text: “one little word” shall “fell” all the evil that threatens “to undo us.” That “word” is the Word of God in Jesus Christ, the identified Holy One, who speaks with the power and authority of God. Who else, then do we need on our side?
Biographical Information
Zink-Sawyer, the Samuel W. Newell, Jr. Professor of Preaching and Worship at Union-PSCE Richmond, focuses on the interaction of homiletics and American religious history with particular attention to women’s preaching. An ordained minister in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), she served churches in Pennsylvania and Tennessee for 15 years and has served on committees at the presbytery and synod levels. She is editor of the Abingdon Women’s Preaching Annual and author of From Preachers to Suffragists: Women’s Rights and Religious Conviction in the Lives of Three Nineteenth-Century American Clergywomen. She was a Lilly Faculty Fellow of the Association of Theological Schools for 2000–2001. Read more!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
