05. Mark 1:21-2:12: Jesus the Healer
“Liberating Space for Change” is
the heading for this first section of Mark. In it God acts to liberate new
space for change in a world where the space he had created (Israel) as
liberating space had closed itself off to him in disobedience and rebellion. It
had become a closed and oppressive space which required a new act of
liberation, a New Exodus. And that is what we have seen in the first part of
this opening section of Mark’s story of Jesus.
-Old Testament promises fulfilled,
-John the Baptist calls for Israel
to gather outside the land at the Jordan River baptizing them in preparation
for this New Exodus,
-Jesus appears among the people and
in baptized by John and affirmed and equipped by God’s voice for his mission as
chief agent of his New Exodus,
-Jesus is tested in the wilderness
by the devil whom he rebuffs and proves himself faithful to is charge,
-He launches the New Exodus
announcing the arrival of God’s kingdom, and
-gathers the nucleus of this New
Exodus.
In this next part of this first
section the liberator begins liberating a new space for change in God’s world.
Jesus
Liberates a Synagogue (Mark 1:21-28)
Though Mark does not shy away from
the reality Jesus evidently displayed as a worker of acts of power (a better
way to put it, I think, than miracle worker), he also works to direct attention
away from those works themselves to their deeper meaning. He does that here by
relocating Jesus from the wilderness to the synagogue, from the place where
demons dwelt to the place where God’s people gathered to worship him.
In this latter place, Jesus rises
to speak, the Lord to his people. He teaches with the authority requisite of
such a figure, authoritative and astounding (v.22). At this point, and in
contrast to the teaching of the scribes they were used to hearing, Jesus’
powerful words rouse a demon who possessed a man who had sat for untold
Sabbaths in that synagogue polluting it with his presence but going undetected
and undealt with (v.23).
But at Jesus’ authoritative word
the demon shrieks, “What have you to do with us, Jesus
of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of
God” (v.24). Curiously, the demon (singular) speaks of “us” Jesus is tormenting
with his authoritative word. Who is this “us”? Mark has already posed an unfavorable
comparison between Jesus’ teaching and that of the scribes (v.22). And he
further heightens that comparison in v.27. This story is, therefore, about
Jesus and the scribes. Sandwiched in between the two parts of this story is the
episode with the possessed man. The demon possessing him identifies itself with
the scribes (the “us”) indicating that the cleansing of the people rendering
them fit for God’s Abrahamic intention for them entails the rejection of their
religious leaders. Jesus’ evident authority makes it clear where the power in
this encounter truly lies.
Myers picks up another nuance to this
story from the function of Hellenistic miracle workers at the time.
“To interpret this exorcism solely as the ‘curing
of an epileptic’ is to miss its profound political impact. In contrast to
Hellenistic literature, in which miracle-workers normally function to maintain
the status quo, gospel healings challenge the ordering of power. Because Jesus
seeks the root causes of why people are marginalized, there is no case of
healing and exorcism in Mark that does not also raise a larger question of
social oppression.”[1]
Jesus Heals in Peter’s Home (Mark 1:29-34)
This story set in Peter’s home has
Jesus healing Peter’s mother-in-law of a fever. After which she gets out of bed
and “serves” Jesus (v.31). Without reading this in the context of the whole
gospel it is customary to read this as Jesus’ healing a minor illness of this
woman who then, like the “good little woman” she is rustles him and the other
men supper. Some rejoinders to this include recognizing that
-a “fever” in the world before antibiotics was
far more serious than it is in ours. This is not a “minor” illness.
-Mark uses the same Greek word for Jesus’
resurrection (“raise,” 16:6) as he does for “lifting up” Peter’s mother-in-law
after healing her (v.31). We are, I believe, to read this as a prototypical
“resurrection” scene. This makes it as important as any other resurrection in
the gospels.
-to “serve” is used by Jesus himself to characterize
his ministry in 10:45 and at the end of the gospel Mark mentions the women
“who, when Jesus was in Galilee, followed him, and served him, and . . .
came up to Jerusalem with him” (15:41). We saw earlier that the women are the
“ideal” disciples in this gospel and here Mark links Peter’s mother-in-law’s
“serving” Jesus with his own “serving” others and with other women who had
likewise “served” him throughout his ministry.[2]
Jesus has brought his liberation to
the home as well as the place of worship making it a site for his ministry. The
summary statement Mark appends at this point has the sick and demon-possessed
at the door of Peter’s home seeking his healing and exorcising touch. It has
indeed become a liberated space for the Liberator to work from!
Jesus
Prays and Discerns his Ministry (Mark 1:35-39)
In need of solitude and time to spend
with alone with God, and in spite of the weariness after such a busy time of
healings surrounded by crowds, Jesus gets up before dawn to seek clarity and
direction (see similarly 6:36; 14:32-39). Though Jesus has acted with divine
authority and power Mark shows us in is need for prayer that he is not God. He
needs his Father’s guidance and direction and knows it. Thus he is able to
discern his next move which doubtless seems counter-intuitive to his disciples.
They are scrambling to find him, thrilled with his success and that everyone is
looking for him. There is more to do here in Capernaum and they want him to get
busy. But he has discerned his mission to move on at this point to other areas
of Galilee. This, of course, but the first but not the worst of his
counter-intuitive moves in Mark.
The mighty worker of great acts of
power; the humble supplicant in need pf God’s guidance – this is the
Christological conundrum Mark intimates here and parses by two each of these
stories in the two parts of his gospel. Boring puts it well:
“Mark here juxtaposes the picture of the weak
human being and the preceding picture of the powerful Son of God, so that
already in these opening scenes there is a mini-summary of the Gospel as a
whole: the “day in Capernaum” anticipates the powerful Jesus of chapters 1– 8;
the lonely prayer already portrays the weak human Jesus of 9– 15, culminating
in Gethsemane and cross.”[3]
Jesus Cleanses a Leper (1:40-45)
On the way from Capernaum Jesus and
his entourage are accosted by a leper (had some sort of skin problem, not
Hansen’s disease as we call leprosy today) desperate for healing. He pleads
with Jesus, sure of his power to heal him, only wanting to know if he wanted to
do so (v.40). Jesus responds viscerally. But in what way? The best manuscript
evidence reads “having compassion” for the man Jesus acted on his request. But
many scholars regard the lesser attested reading “was angry” (for some
unspecified reason but not at the person himself) as more likely original on
the principle that the more difficult reading is to be preferred. In other
words, it’s easier to explain a scribe change “was angry” to “have compassion”
than the reverse. That scribe may not have wanted to ascribe anger to Jesus.
And more later scribes followed this one than those who kept “was angry.”
Whichever reading we go with the text
invites us to note that this person afflicted with a communicable skin disease
that rendered them unfit to belong to the community is asking Jesus to take
over a priest’s role. Priestly administration of the cleansing ritual was the
way such a thing was dealt with. Whether this person had tried and for some
reason been unsuccessful engaging a priest to do this for them or had heard of
Jesus’ healing abilities and decided to take a chance on him we don’t know. We
do know Jesus was moved to grant the request. But he performed no ritual.
Merely a touch. And contrary to expectation and the purity code Jesus does not
contract impurity from this contact but rather his holiness and purity run the
other direction and effect the healing.
For whatever reason this leprous person
had not been helped or did not expect to be helped by the temple system.
Perhaps thus was why Jesus might have been angry. The system God installed to
help persons like this find health and belonging had failed this one. Mark
probably means us to understand this as a regular failing and not a solitary
occasion. This group of afflicted folks had been marginalized by it and left as
outcasts to be avoided.
Jesus sends the healed leper to the
temple to present himself to the priests who had failed or chose not to help
him as a “testimony against them” rather than “to them” (NRSV), an indictment
of their insensitivity and failure and, indeed, the whole system. He does not
get to the temple, however, as his joy and eagerness to share with others what
Jesus had done for him impels him to disobey Jesus’ command to silence. He in
effect presents himself to the people in the area as testimony to Jesus’
gracious power rather than to the priests as an indictment of their system.
This draws Jesus even more attention
and fame. So much that he cannot freely come and go without getting more
attention than he wants. He retires to the countryside but still they come to
find him. Now he is known as one who heals outside of and in spite of the
temple system, a renegade healer, through God nonetheless seems to work.
Doubtless this “outlawed” him in the eyes of the temple leadership.
His next action will do so even
more.
Jesus
Heals a Paralytic (Mark2:1-12)
The final episode in this compilation
of “Jesus the Healer” stories finds Jesus home again in Capernaum and quickly
besieged by the crowds among whom are supplicants and antagonists of Jesus. The
house is so full of people that four friends bearing another paralyzed friend
to Jesus for healing cannot get in to see him. Undaunted they got themselves
and their friend to the roof and began to open it up to lower their friend’s
pallet down to him. They succeed. When Jesus sees “their” faith (all of them,
not just the paralyzed person) he pronounces the paralyzed fellow forgiven
(v.5).
This sets off the scribes in the crowd
who immediately think “Blasphemy - only God can do that!” (v.7). Jesus, aware
of their unvoiced objections, counters with a question: “Which is easier, to say to the paralytic,
‘Your sins are forgiven,’ or to say, ‘Stand up and take your mat and walk’? But
so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins
. . .” (v.9) he heals the paralytic and bids him get up pick up his pallet and
go home. And he did. Everyone was amazed and glorified God.
Okay, what’s going on here? A radical vision of the great promise of
Jubilee taking shape in and through Jesus right in front of the crowd’s eyes,
that’s what! Jesus “teaches” (vv.2,7) while the scribes “reason” (vv.6,8).[4]
Jesus opens the scripture to fuller understanding. The scribes want to
reinforce existing understandings and norms. One of those key norms is that the
physically defective are in a permanently inferior status because of their
condition. They are thus “indebted” to the larger society. This is God’s
intention and way his people must uphold. The scribes are doing their religious
duty when they object to Jesus announcement of this person’s forgiveness (the
release of his indebtedness).
Jesus identifies himself here as the
“Son of Man” (his characteristic self-definition) and claims as such he has the
“authority” to forgive sins. To demonstrate this he heals the paralytic and
bids him “stand up” (“rise” – that resurrection word again!) and go home. By
this act, Jesus reveals himself the fulfiller of the spirit of ancient Jubilee
laws (Lev.25). This wondrous legislation required a once a generation (every 50
years) levelling of Israelite society that entailed a comprehensive liberation
involving:
-releasing community members from debt (Lev.25:35-42;
Dt.15:1-11);
-returning land forfeited to its original
owners (Lev.25:13,25-28);
-freeing slaves (Lev.25:47-55; Dt.15:12-18).
Though Israel likely never really
practiced Jubilee it remained “on the books” as a dream or a promised yet to be
redeemed. It remained a powerful influence in Israel and its prophets drew on
its imagery to articulate their vision for the ultimate fulfilment of God’s
purposes for his people and his world (Isa.61:1ff.) All things would be made
new (Isa.43:18,19) and all that limited, oppressed, or held them back for being
the people God intended them to be.
The “Son of Man” is from Dan.7:13
where this victorious figure is given rule and authority by the Ancient of
Days. Jesus melds Jubilee and Son of Man together to express his own sense of
identity and mission and declares himself here the bringer of Jubilee
fulfilment and by healing the paralytic he expresses the fullness of liberation
come to this person. His “debts” are forgiven, his slavery to his condition is
removed, and he is restored to responsible and productive membership in the
community.
Therefore, if the Son of Man is the
bringer of the fullness of Jubilee does not that entail his authority to
forgive sins? No wonder onlookers were astonished and gave glory to God (even
if such responses finally fall short of true faith in Jesus as they seem to in
Mark).
If Jesus is the fulfiller of God’s most
profound dreams for the kind of community he wants Israel and the world to be,
and he works outside the temple system (for that is where one would go to
receive God’s forgiveness), then he is superior to that system and not bound to
its norms even of those norms were God-given for the people until the time of
their fulfiller’s arrival.
Comments
Post a Comment