The Lectionary and Scripture Interpretation for Ordinary Time
Click here for more information.
Genesis 2:18-24
In Genesis, there are two creation stories. One explains why we need to rest. This was directed at the Babylonian exiles who returned to the homeland and needed to be reminded about the importance of the Law. Sabbath rest was seen as fundamental in those laws.
The second creation story, which we read today, deals with the question of why there is evil in the world. It also highlights the importance of community. These same returning exiles needed to be reminded that they didn’t live in isolation. They formed a community. And at the heart of that was the family.
This creation story starts with everything already created. Then God makes a man, puts him in the garden of Eden, and tells him not to eat from certain trees.
Theological anthropology is the study of what it means to be human. One aspect of this is found in v18: to be human means to be in community, not alone. The first creation story says that God made humans in God’s image and likeness. What does it mean to be human? It means being in the divine image. There are many answers to this question.
In vv19-20, God begins to provide community by creating the animals. The man names the animals but “none proved to be a helper suited to the man.” The animals are not equals with the man – they’re inferior and they don’t provide an adequate community.
V23 is part of our wedding liturgy. Flesh and bone together describe the whole human person. The animals were inferior to Adam because they were not like him, they were not human. Eve is suitable because she is like him; she is his equal.
This creation story is often used to justify the inferiority of women. One commentary suggested that if the woman is inferior to the man because she was created from his rib, then perhaps the man is inferior to the ground because that’s what he was created from.
These verses are also looked to to justify the impossibility of same-sex unions. We have one story here, handed on through oral tradition over thousands of years. When these stories were committed to writing at the time of the Babylonian exile, the Jewish people wanted, perhaps, to capture the ideals of their time. This story served that purpose, but I do not think it necessarily needs to be seen as the single source of what relationships must look like. I realize this may be a problematic suggestion for some, but what I know of God is that she is a source of endless variety. I am always wary of things that want to box in and too narrowly define that variety.
Consider the question: what does it mean for you to be human? What characteristics and traits make you human? How many of those do you share with other humans? Is a need for community one of those necessary traits?
Hebrews 2:9-11
Last week we finished up the book of James and today we move into the book of Hebrews. For the remainder of this liturgical year, we’ll cover the first ten chapters. At the end of the next liturgical year we cover the last three chapters which is more practical in nature. The book can pose many problems because it is addressed to an audience with a deep Jewish identity. It uses Jewish symbols and language that don’t necessarily speak to us today. That said, there are many messages in the book that transcend the culture, such as calling on the great witnesses of faith.
Vv5-7 are a quote from Psalm 8, which is a song of pure praise rooted in the beauty of creation. This is a fitting connection to Jesus’ teaching around divorce that goes back to God’s original vision of creation. Psalm 8 praises the pinnacle of creation – human beings, made a little lower than the angels but with glory and honor. The author of Hebrews adapts this specifically to Jesus. He interprets being made lower than the angels as the entirety of the Paschal mystery.
V10 says that Jesus was “made perfect.” We usually think of perfection as making something completely free from faults or defects, but we know Jesus was already free from faults. The sense here is being absolute and complete. “A perfect stranger.” Jesus was made complete through his suffering.
Pray with Psalm 8 as a song of praise to God. Then try praying with it as the story of Jesus.
How is it fitting that Jesus was made complete through suffering? In what ways has suffering brought you wholeness?
Mark 10:2-16
Through the end of chp 8, the primary question of the gospel has been “Who is this man?!” Peter answered that question by naming Jesus the Messiah. Jesus doesn’t deny that but he’s still got a lot of teaching to do for them and us to realize what that really means.
The gradual healing of the blind man in 8:22 is key to interpreting chps 9-10. The man can see the first time around, but he doesn’t see clearly. Neither do the disciples. They name Jesus as the Messiah but they don’t see clearly what that entails.
Chps 8-10 there will be a pattern of three actions and it will repeat three times:
- Prediction of Jesus’ passion
- An inappropriate response
- Teaching on discipleship
The week before last started us on the second repeat of this pattern. Jesus predicted his passion and death. The inappropriate response was silence and fear, and then Jesus begins teaching what it means to be a Messiah, which is intricately intertwined with what it means to be a disciple. Today will continue the teaching on discipleship by taking on the contentious issue of divorce.
Even in the New Testament, there was a development of the early church’s attitude toward divorce:
- 1 Corinthians written in 53AD says there are exceptions only for an unbelieving spouse
- Mark written in 70AD says there are no exceptions
- Matthew written in 85AD says there are no exceptions “unless the marriage is unlawful” (Matthew 19:9)
This topic has been contentious from the start. It helps to situate the topic of divorce in the first-century world. Romans used divorce quite liberally. Both men and women could divorce on pretty much any grounds, and there was no social, political, or economic backlash for doing so. Judaism had two schools of thought. One school held a strict view that divorce could only be sought in cases of marital infidelity. Another, more lenient school, allowed divorce for any number of reasons. There was perhaps more stigma around it in Jewish society than in Roman society, but nothing like the stigma in the Puritan world of early American culture.
Both of these cultural backgrounds are quite different than our current culture’s view of divorce.
The lectionary begins with v2 but v1 is important. Back in 9:30, Jesus began a secret journey through Galilee where he was only teaching his closest disciples. Now Jesus is making the move from Gentile territory (the Decapolis and Galilee) into the region of Judea, home of Jerusalem, and he’s opening up his audience again to the larger crowds.
For cultural context, we can go back to earlier in the gospel:
For Herod himself had given orders to have John [the Baptist] arrested, and he had him bound and put in prison. He did this because of Herodias, his brother Philip’s wife, whom he had married. For John had been saying to Herod, “It is not lawful for you to have your brother’s wife.” So Herodias nursed a grudge against John and wanted to kill him.
Mark 6:17-19
The move into Judea is significant – this was Herod’s territory. John the Baptist paid the ultimate price for opposing Herod’s divorce and remarriage. The Pharisees are now going to see if they can drag Jesus into this same opposition. This is much like the question of whether the Jews should pay taxes – it seems like no matter what you say, you’ll offend someone, either politically or religiously.
So in v2 the Pharisees pose a question to test Jesus: “Is it lawful for a husband to divorce his wife?” The word used here is a more generic Greek word meaning “to send away or dismiss”; this word is not always translated as divorced. Sometimes it’s just Jesus sending away or dismissing the crowds, which is the most common use of this word in the New Testament. But it can also mean the legal action of dissolving a marriage and sending the wife away.
Jesus very cleverly turns it back on them by asking what the Law says. Of course, the Pharisees are more than happy to teach this obviously ignorant guy from the sticks and put him in his place. Their response is taken from Deuteronomy 24:1-4. They root their answer in the Torah. The Mosaic bill of divorce made clear that the woman was no longer married and the man no longer had any claims against her. Some scholars say it was intended to protect the woman, who had precious few protections in her culture. That’s what Moses commanded; or, more accurately, allowed. Notice that Jesus asks what is commanded but the reply is what is permitted.
Jesus then references the hardness of their hearts, the Greek word sklerokardia, which means a stubborn refusal to yield to God. Because the ancient Israelites stubbornly refused to yield to God, Moses gave them options. But Jesus reminds them that the Mosaic law came later. Creation was first. Jesus quotes back to them something older than the Mosaic law – from the Genesis reading.
In vv6-8 Jesus quotes Genesis, and then in v9 he will add his own interpretation to it. Jesus says that the Mosaic law gave concessions because the people could not or would not live up to God’s commands. But Jesus goes back to God’s original intent of creation, which was that divorce was never part of the original plan; relationships were intended to be permanent.
The Pharisees posed this question in order to trap Jesus. But Jesus neatly sidesteps that by giving an answer that is firmly rooted in the Torah. The religious authorities can’t argue with this. It also places the condemnation as coming from God, not Jesus; so Herod can’t rightly be offended by what Jesus himself has said.
So what do we make of this in our modern world? We are living in the now but not yet. Jesus has conquered sin and death, but we still live in a world subject to sin and death. In the primordial pre-fall world, untouched by sin, the marriage relationship was envisioned to be absolute and permanent. That is the ideal that Jesus calls us to. But it’s not the only ideal he calls us to. And it’s not the only one we often fail to live up to.
This is an example of what Jesus in Matthew’s gospel does quite often: pointing us to go beyond the law. The Torah makes exceptions (for men!) but Jesus says the ideal is no exceptions. As one commentary put it, “The law was shaped for those for whom it was written – it is concessionary by nature.” But God wills that we live to a higher standard than the concessionary law. Perhaps we could say that, rather than ruling out divorce, Jesus elevates marriage. He doesn’t say that we should stigmatize and make pariahs out of the divorced. He says sometimes divorce happens, but, like so much else that happens because of sin, it’s not what God envisioned. We should strive for that original creation vision, but we know we won’t always live up to it. In other places, Jesus will tell us to have compassion for those who fail, those who do not live up to the ideals. In other words, to have compassion for ourselves and others.
That’s Jesus’ teaching to the crowds. In v10, the inner group of disciples asks him to clarify further. To the Pharisees and the crowds, Jesus gives an answer that no one can fault. To the inner group, he will shift the focus. If marriage is indissoluble, then it follows that any remarriage would be sinful. The Torah permitted only the husband to divorce, which is addressed by v11. Roman culture permitted women to do so as well, which is addressed by v12. Mark’s audience was both Gentile and Roman. It might have been original to Jesus to equalize things. Or Mark could have been adapting Jesus’ teaching to new audiences and new questions. But again, this all follows from an original vision of creation. As always, Jesus calls us into an ideal that will only be fully realized at the end of time. And we know from other places that Jesus teaches compassion and mercy, which God offers and we are called to live by.
The rest of the passage deals with children, a natural connection in a society that expected marriage to produce children. It was just a few verses ago that Jesus took a little child in his arms as a visible parable on what it means to enter the kingdom. Now people are bringing children to Jesus and what do the disciples do but try and turn them away. Have these guys been listening? But do we listen any better? Time after time, the disciples give an inappropriate response. Here they are seeking to protect the status of their group and it’s leader. An important teacher like Jesus doesn’t have time for nobodies!
In v14 Jesus is indignant at their response. He goes back to his object lesson from Mark 9:36-37: the emphasis on serving the least, and not being concerned about one’s own personal status. A child has nothing with which to buy its way into the kingdom; a child can do nothing to achieve it. They are dependent on the parent to give. A disciple who wants to enter the kingdom must do so like a little child.
Take some time to wrestle with this passage and your own viewpoints and experiences around divorce. How do you see things and how might you see things through other lenses?
Dulwich Picture Gallery, London
Copyrights and source information
© 2024 Kelly Sollinger