Is it Caesar's or God's?

 

  
 Once again in Mark 10:2-16, the Pharisees ask Jesus about divorce "to test" him and once again they misunderstand or misuse the scripture to justify their agenda. They hope their question will expose Jesus as dangerous to families, in light of his scandalous comments in prior encounters. 

In typical fashion Jesus turns the table on the Pharisees away from their legal foundation for divorce to God's design for marriage. Because of the hardness of your hearts, he [Moses] wrote you this commandment. But from the beginning of creation, God made them [husband and wife] male and female. For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother, and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. So they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together no human being must separate.

God is love. We are products of God’s love and handiwork, a small but unique part of God’s great ongoing work of art. Love cannot be governed by temporal laws of man any more than God can. We speak of marriage, a construct of civil law that we attempt to apply to God’s law, as a contract. But is it?

I can remember studying what goes into the essential parts of a valid contract in a Business Law course a long time ago. For a contract to be valid there must be a valid offer and a valid acceptance of that offer; there must be an agreed upon exchange, or a quid pro quo, that is “something for something,” and the contract must detail specified “consideration,” a term used to affix a value exchange, usually money or equitable services rendered.

“God established a creation, a covenant bond, with humanity, with A-dam. Adam’s name is not only the name of an individual, the founding father of the human race, but it’s also the Hebrew word for humanity…The difference between covenant and contract, in the Old Testament and throughout scripture, is profound. Contractual relations usually exchange property, exchange goods and services, whereas covenants exchange persons. So when people enter into a covenant, they say, ‘I am yours and you are mine.’ So God uses the covenant to enter into a relationship with those whom he created in his own image: humanity and all human persons.” (Scott Hahn, Contract vs. Covenant, Outlook, February, 2002.)

So how do we apply a transactional agreement to love? We can’t. Love cannot be governed by man. No human can break the love between two people; it’s not theirs to break. Once again in our reading, Jesus refuses to be trapped by either the Pharisees or his disciples as he challenges the rules of men with the law of God. Each of the synoptic gospels cite some variation on Jesus’ take on separation of Church and state with the famous quote Render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s. This phrase has profound resonance throughout scripture and God’s law based on his love and covenant with man. It has become widely quoted as a summary statement of the relationship between Christianity and secular authority that goes far beyond whether it was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar. 

"We renew our faith in the word of the Lord which invites faithful families to this openness. It invites all those who want to share the prophecy of the covenant of man and woman, which generates life and reveals God!”(Pope Francis, Openness, 9-27-15, Philadelphia)

"I leave you with this question, for each one of you to respond to. In my home, do we yell, or do we speak with love and tenderness? This is a good way to recognize our love.
(Pope Francis, Patience, 9-26-15, NYC)

All are Welcome

There are many themes in Mark 9:38-50 that are ripe for discussion: Jesus' tolerance for an unknown exorcist and his apparent criticism of his disciples' desire for exclusivism; the danger of being a “stumbling block” to others, and the concern for loss of identity.

Clearly, the disciples view their relationship with Jesus as exclusively theirs. Jesus instructs them that anyone who offers another a cup of water in his name is doing it in the name of the One who sent him. As it was then and is now, the followers of Jesus do not belong to an exclusive club; the love of God has no boundaries and cannot be confined to the four walls of any church or denomination

At the time of Mark’s writing, “Christianity” had yet to be named as such and although the relatively small number of Jesus’ followers were in the midst of persecution, they were struggling for an identity of their own. At that time they were considered as “non-Jews” or Gentiles. Today, we still reference people who are not part of our group as non-Christian or non-Catholic, etc. Richard Rohr speaks about those who need to be identified in some exclusive way so as to be recognized as a member of a group. He refers to people’s use of religious “sign posts” so that they can be recognized as members of an organization or specific denomination. However, all too often institutional “church-club” membership exists as an end in itself and not as the basis for following Jesus. Group membership is commendable as a means to self-identify and as a means to express communal pride and fraternity, but it’s not when it is used to exclude or suggest a sense of elitism or superiority.

Commentators tell us that the Greek word, skandalon, is defined as an obstacle that people trip over and gets in the way. It has been colloquially translated as a “stumbling block.” Today the word scandal denotes a decidedly moralistic tone. In the context of this gospel, Jesus’ reference to stumbling block has nothing to do with scandal as we know it. Rather, he was quite clear that his warning was directed to anyone who would lead his followers astray: Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin it would be better for him if a great millstone were put around his neck and he were thrown into the sea. In other words anyone or anything that got in the way of a follower’s relationship with God was a stumbling block.

By extension, Jesus refers to the awesome responsibility that those closest to him have as leaders. It’s interesting that in these verses Jesus lays bare the minefield of the church and the real dangers within the Christian community then and now. Those most vulnerable “little ones” within the Body of Christ may be impressionable and susceptible to irreparable damage as a result of stumbling blocks caused by careless discipleship.

In this gospel, stumbling blocks can come disguised as precious body parts that can be so “dangerous” that they must be severed. The violence in Jesus' use of hyperbole here is inescapable. He purposely uses this over-the-top language to get the disciples', and our, attention. We are likely to think there's nothing worse than losing a hand, a foot, or an eye. But Jesus says there is…the consequences of causing another to stumble are far worse than self-maiming.

Jesus asks us to examine not only those stumbling blocks that get in the way of our faith, but those that we place, wittingly or not, in the way of others. Here he includes the Church community and individuals within. Jesus does not confine his attention to Church leaders, its hierarchy and priests, but is speaking to each to one of us who are in a position to influence the “little ones,” young and old.

 

 

Satan...really??? What did I say that was so wrong?

 

Suppose this was the first time you were reading Mark’s words in his Mark 8:27-38. You might wonder if these people really knew each other or if they had an identity crisis. On the one hand Jesus asks "Who do people say that I am?" On the other, his close “friends” who are all over the lot, respond "John the Baptist,” and others, “Elijah,” and still others, “one of the prophets." Now, this is after they have seen him feed thousands; cure the sick; raise the dead, and cast out demons. This is also after he’s provided enough clues as to who he really is. 

Then, after Peter, comes up with the right answer, so we think, and proclaims “You are the Messiah.” Jesus turns to his disciples and rebukes Peter…and calls him, “Satan” and tells him that he is setting is mind on human things, not divine things.    

Now here’s a loaded question, which of the two is confused? I did say it was a loaded question but, in fairness to Peter why did he get it wrong or does even get partial credit? (Tuesday, September 11, 2012 rrr)

 

We are Ministers to One Another

How often have we read about Jesus’ healing the sick; restoring speech to the impaired; sight to the blind, and hearing to the deaf? Somehow we have become jaded to Jesus’ ability to perform miracles: after all isn’t this what God and the most divinely inspired human can do? I recall having read somewhere that the great mystery of the incarnation of God in Jesus is not his divinity but his living fully in his humanity.

We spent most of this summer reading and discussing John’s Gospel. We delved into what the mystical significance of the Bread of Life; the sharing of the Bread, and what the Word becoming flesh in each of us means.

We strive to be in a “right relationship with God.” This is what being a Christian and living the Word is all about, right? But what does being in a right relationship with God really mean? Let’s close our eyes and picture this for a minute. Note, I use the word “picture,” not “understand,” in an effort to prompt our imagination and senses to feel the words as a palpable, sensory experience, and know what being in a relationship with God actually feels like, tastes like, and smells like.

God fully shared our humanity through Jesus as we through Jesus, fully share in God’s divinity. Anything less than that relationship with God would be reduced to mere acquaintance. So, with this as our premise, we consider Mark 7: 31-37 from the perspective of both the healer and one who is in need of healing. Do we ever think of ourselves as “healers”? Think of the times we listen, comfort and support one another.

Sure, we know what it means to want to be cured or be free of pain, and we can relate to medical professionals who are trained to provide healing and cure. But where does that leave us and what does this have to do with either Mark or the John of our summer and how the two Gospels relate?

There are so many ailments that are outside the bounds of the medical professional’s ability. But yet, somewhere within resides our ability to reach out and heal or be healed. The readings of John help us consider our Gospel in Mark with inspired eyes and ears.

What is required for us to be healed or the healer or both? Why do we resist the potential that resides within each of us? We hear but do not listen while remarkable things happen all the time, and we dismiss them as “coincidences.”

“Our ministering and supporting one another morph into the essence​ of our being and become who we are, as if they exist as an integral part of us. We become ever changed by their existence. Like an encrusted stone picking up moss while rolling down a hill, we are ever changed with each turn… And at the core is "love" God's love. I suppose, this is what's meant by becoming the Word. We need not speak of what we do, they describe us and speak quietly; and we give thanks for them.” (Ministries RRR 7-28-15)