Peter gets it right. Sort of...

24th Sunday of Ordinary Time, year B | Mark 8:27-35

If you were to type in “Jesus” into a Google image search, you would see a wide variety of representations of Jesus. Images range from a regal-looking Jesus in a Byzantine icon, to a painting of Jesus from the 1970’s where he looks a lot like a surfer. People have always pictured Jesus differently Since our goal as Christians is to become like Jesus, that is, to imitate Jesus, the way that we perceive the identity of Jesus will greatly affect how we try to live. In the Gospel today (Mark 8:27-35), Jesus asks Peter a direct question about his identity: “who do you say that I am?” In his answer, Peter gets the identity of Jesus right. Well, sort of.

Peter is correct to say that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah. He got that much right. The location, the region of Caesarea Philippi, in which Peter made this assertion is significant. Caesarea Philippi was a city built by Philip, the son of Herod the Great, in a place of great natural beauty to the North of the Sea of Galilee. This area was closely associated with two figures who many revered as gods and bringers of salvation. First, in the region of Caesarea Philippi there was a famous shrine to the Greek god pan. It was an important place of pilgrimage which people visited to seek assistance from this god of the wild. It was a kind of pagan Lourdes. Second, this area was also home to a shrine to Augustus Caesar, a ruler who was referred to by titles such as “Son of God”, “Lord” and “Saviour”. It is, therefore, significant that it was in Caesarea Philippi that Peter made his declaration about Jesus. In a place saturated with devotion to the god Pan and to Caesar, figures some looked to as saviours, Peter claims that Jesus is the Christ, the anointed one sent by God to save his people. Peter asserts that Jesus, and not Pan or Caesar, is the true saviour.

The remains of the Pan sanctuary
(source: EdoM [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons)

Although Peter is right to say that Jesus is the Christ, he has misunderstood completely what kind of Messiah Jesus is. He therefore failed to grasp how Jesus would accomplish God’s work of salvation. Have you ever had the experience when you use a particular word for quite a while only to discover some time later that you misunderstood what the word meant and were using it incorrectly all along? Whenever I visit an elementary school classroom to talk about the priesthood and vocations, I usually ask the class if anyone can explain what a “seminary” is. Without fail, one of the students will shout back, “the place where they bury dead people!” Peter is right to call Jesus the Christ, but he clearly has the wrong idea of what it means for Jesus to be the Christ. Peter, like many Jews at the time, was probably expecting the Messiah to be a mighty ruler who would cast off the burden of Roman oppression with military might. When Jesus explained that he would suffer, be rejected and put to death, Peter cannot accept it. This was not the kind of Messiah that he expected Jesus to be. A Messiah could not suffer in this way! In response to Peter’s protests, Jesus rebukes him, calling him Satan, the adversary. Jesus makes it clear that Peter has not yet grasped what kind of Christ he truly is.

If we, like Peter, misunderstand what kind of Messiah Jesus is, then we misunderstand what it means to follow him. If the purpose of our life is to imitate Christ, then the way we picture Jesus will shape the manner of our life. We go seriously astray as Christians when we have the wrong idea about Jesus’ identity. For example, a popular movement in Christianity preaches the prosperity gospel. In a nutshell, this teaches that if we follow Christ we will obtain material prosperity. In order to justify such a claim, adherents convince themselves that Jesus himself was actually quite rich (e.g.). Sure, Jesus was born in a manger, but he received expensive gifts, didn’t he? Or, if we picture Jesus as some kind of prototypical hippie wandering the countryside (like in the “surfer Jesus” image), then we might understand Christianity to be just another means to self-actualization and fulfillment. In the Gospel, Jesus is clear about what kind of Christ he is and therefore what it means to follow him. He is a Messiah who will lay down his life. He will rise, but first he must die. If we want to follow him, then we too must lay down our life. Following Jesus requires sacrificing ourselves out of love for others. The path leads to life, but it is radical, challenging and costs everything.

The image that we have of Jesus is important because it determines the type of Christian that we strive to be. In our tradition, we have a great custom that is meant to powerfully remind us what kind of Messiah Jesus is and what it means to follow him: the sign of the Cross. Whenever we make the sign of the cross, we are meant to remind ourselves that Jesus was a Messiah who suffered and died for us. When we trace the sign of the cross over our body, we are meant to remind ourselves that as followers of Jesus we are called to deny ourselves, take up our cross and lay down our lives for others. The next time you make the sign of the cross, remind yourself what kind of Messiah Jesus was and therefore kind of life following him entails.

Why does Jesus speak Aramaic in the Gospel?

23 Sunday Ordinary Time, year B | Mark 7:31-37

One of my teachers was fond of telling us that when we study a text from Bible we need to imitate Sherlock Holmes by focusing on small details within the text. He often repeated this line of Sherlock Holmes to us: “it is, of course, a trifle, but there is nothing so important as trifles”(1). My teacher’s point was that small details in the text - what we might consider mere trifles - are often highly significant. I would like to focus on one such trifle from the Gospel today (Mark 7:31-37), the word ephphatha spoken by Jesus when he heals the deaf man.

James Tissot [No restrictions or Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

When we know the language that Jesus spoke, we learn something very important about his identity. All the Gospels were written in koine Greek. This was the common language used throughout the Roman empire at the time of Jesus. As Greek was the language of the Empire, it can rightly be described as the language of the rulers. Since the Holy Land was under Roman rule at the time of Christ, Greek was the language of those who exercised power over Jesus and the rest of the Jewish people. Greek, however, was not the mother tongue of Jesus. Although Jesus probably spoke Hebrew and perhaps some Greek, the main language that he spoke was Aramaic. If Greek was the language of the rulers in 1st century Palestine, Aramaic was the language of the ruled. In the Gospels, the words of Jesus are predominantly recorded in Greek, even though he spoke Aramaic. There are, however, some instances in which Jesus is depicted as speaking Aramaic. The Gospel today is one such example. The word ephphatha is an Aramaic word meaning “be opened”. That we should find this Aramaic word in a sea of Greek is an important trifle. Why would Mark record this Aramaic word of Jesus? Why not have Jesus always speaking in Greek? By having Jesus speak an Aramaic word in the Gospel today, Mark reminds us that Jesus spoke the language of the ruled rather than the rulers (2). This teaches us something very important about Jesus. Jesus did not come from among those who were powerful or exercised political force over others. Jesus was numbered among those who were dominated, often harshly, by others. He was one of the ruled and not the rulers.

The Gospel today shows us that God works his salvation through those who lack worldly authority and strength rather than those that society deems as powerful. In the Gospel, Jesus cures the deaf man in the region of the Decapolis. The Decapolis was a group of ten autonomous city-states that were dependent on Rome.  The language, culture and political status of these cities made them particularly associated with the Roman empire, the rulers of the land in which Jesus lived. For this reason, it is highly significant that Mark records Jesus as speaking Aramaic - the language of the ruled - while performing a miracle in this region. While accomplishing this work of salvation, Mark highlights that Jesus is one of the oppressed in the symbolic center of imperial authority. Throughout the Bible, we find this same pattern: God consistently brings salvation through the ruled rather than the rulers. In the Old Testament, God chose Israel to be his special possession through whom he would bring his salvation to the world (cf. Isa 49:6). In comparison to the nations that surrounded them, the people of Israel were not a dominating force. Before the time of Jesus, they were subjected by a long list of nations and empires: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece and finally Rome. Israel, God’s chosen instrument of salvation for the world, was usually among the ruled rather than the rulers.  As was the case with Israel, in Jesus we see that God uses those considered powerless in the eyes of the world to accomplish his work of salvation.

The Church, therefore, is at its best and is most effective when it is with the powerless, poor, marginalized and oppressed. Consider this: what building or monument is considered to be the symbol of Catholicism in the world? I think that many people would consider St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome to be the visible symbol of the Catholic Church. Although this Basilica is beautiful and an important place of pilgrimage, it would be unfortunate if this were considered THE monument of the Church in society. This is because, to many, the Basilica and the Vatican State in which it is found communicates riches and worldly power. I would suggest that the buildings that far better represent what the Church is and should be are the numerous and often hidden buildings close to St. Peter’s in which acts of charity are performed. There are in fact numerous soup kitchens, hospices, dormitories and parishes around St. Peter’s in which the poor are cared for and the hopeless and those who mourn and lack direction hear the Good News of Jesus preached. Since God uses those who are powerless in the eyes of the world to bring salvation and healing to the world, the Church is at its best when it is close to those who are oppressed and suffering.

The small “trifle” of Jesus speaking Aramaic in the Gospel is significant. With it, Mark highlights that Jesus spoke the language of the ruled.  It shows us that God works his salvation through the powerless and oppressed. This small detail of language in the Gospel invites us to consider how our “language” as individual Catholics and as a parish are interpreted. What do our words and actions convey to those around us? Do people hear from us a desire for power and self-aggrandizement? Or, do they hear from us a message of love and concern for the weak and oppressed?

Footnotes:

1) The quote is from The Man with the Twisted Lip, Arthur Conan Doyle.

2) I first heard this explanation from another of my teachers, Fr. Craig Morrison.

What makes us defiled/unclean and causes division?

22 Sunday Ordinary Time, year B | Deut 4:1-2, 6-8; Mk 7:1-8, 14-15, 21-23

We have all probably heard the nursery rhyme Humpty Dumpty. “Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall, Humpty Dumpty had a great fall. All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty together again.” Humanity could perhaps be compared to Humpty Dumpty. It has fallen and broken into pieces. Our society and even our Church seems quite divided. This separation appears to be growing. Can we be put back together again?

By Denslow's_Humpty_Dumpty.djvu: W. W. Denslowderivative work: Theornamentalist [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons

At the core of the Gospel (from Mark 7), is the following question: what separates a person or group of people from God and the rest of the community? In other words, what break us apart and creates division? The answer hinges upon the important - but complicated - concepts clean/unclean and pure/defiled (for an overview, see Fr. Neyrey, SJ). Put simply, if you were considered unclean or defiled, then you were considered unfit to worship God and were separated from the community. If, on the other hand, you were deemed clean or pure, then you would be deemed fit to worship God and be a part of the community. Although there are numerous reasons why you could be considered defiled, two are especially important for the Gospel. First, you would be considered unclean if you violated one of the numerous dietary laws (cf. Lev 11) - what can and cannot be eaten - that were given by God through Moses. As the first reading from Deuteronomy makes clear, observing God’s laws is imperative. Second, some argued that if you violated one of the Traditions of the Elders, then you were unclean. The Tradition of the Elders were a collection of detailed laws of human origin (i.e. not found in the Law of Moses). The Gospel mentions some of the Traditions of the Elders that were held in great importance by the scribes and Pharisees, for example, the washing of hands before a meal and the purification of cups and other utensils. The Pharisees accused the disciples of violating the Tradition of the Elders, thereby making themselves unclean, which would have made them unfit to worship God and separated them from the community.

Jesus’ teaching about what makes someone clean/unclean reveals something very important about how he understood his identity. There is a certain argument out there that goes as follows (e.g. see here). Jesus never claimed to be God. He saw himself as a prophet or teacher. Sure, there are some texts in which Jesus claims Divinity (e.g. Jn 8:58), but these are late texts and reflect more the beliefs of later followers of Jesus rather than Jesus himself. Today’s Gospel, taken from Mark, which is generally considered to be the oldest of the Gospels, argues against this. Jesus’ actions manifest his self understanding. First, Jesus saw himself as a teacher who had the authority to challenge the validity of the Tradition of the Elders. Elsewhere in Mark 7, Jesus shows how following the Tradition of the Elders can lead people to transgress the commandments of God (Mk 7:9-13). Jesus, however, goes further than this. Jesus says, “nothing that enters one from outside can defile that person; but the things that come out from within are what defile.” Since this goes against the dietary laws that were passed down from God through Moses, here Jesus is claiming the authority to revise the law of God. Although in Mark’s Gospel (unlike in John’s) Jesus never explicitly says he is the one God of Israel, we have here a clear example of how Jesus’ actions show that he understood he was the very embodiment of God’s presence walking the earth. God’s law can only be changed by God himself.

Jesus, the very embodiment of God, teaches us that we become unclean/defiled and therefore separated from God and others on account of malicious thoughts, words and actions that originate within ourselves and are directed towards others. We are not separated from God and others on account of what we eat, or on account of some “human tradition”. Rather, it is what comes from within, our hateful thoughts, words and actions that make us unclean/defiled. This is what creates divisions between us and God and within the community. This is an important message because we can all consider individuals to be separated from God or the community on account of some “human tradition”. We have replaced the Pharisees’ concern for the washing of cups, jugs and kettles with other preoccupations. We can consider people “defiled” on account of the political party they ascribe to, the news they watch, the country they are from (or, more specifically, the part of a country or even city they are from), the school they went to, the job they have or even the sports team they support. Within the Church we create division between ourselves and others because they are too conservative or too liberal, too traditional or too progressive or because they are or are not part of a particular group or movement. In the Gospel, Jesus invites us focus on what truly causes division: cruel thoughts, words and actions that we direct towards others.

An important principle follows from Jesus teaching. If malicious thoughts, words and actions create division, then it follows that loving thoughts, words and deeds create unity. “All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put Humpty together again”. Jesus, who we have seen in the Gospel is God, can put us back together. He has shown us both what breaks us apart and divides us, as well as how we can work to put together the broken pieces of humanity. Unity or division begins within the heart of each on of us and is furthered by our words and actions. Today we can ask ourselves whether we will add to the division in the world, or help build unity.