Proper 22B; Genesis 2:18-24;
Mark 10:2-9; St. Paul’s, 10/07/2018
Jim Melnyk, “Holy Partners”
In today’s passage
from Mark Jesus is finally getting close to Jerusalem. In Mark’s gospel he’s spent all his time up to
this point in Galilee and the Gentile regions north of Galilee. Now he’s coming to Jerusalem – the place
where all great prophets eventually find themselves. The country teacher and preacher finds
himself in the region of the big city and crowds come out to see him and hear
him teach. Most likely they’re probably hoping
to see a miracle or two along the way. A
group of Pharisees from the region come out to test Jesus – in essence they’re
there to check out his bona fides – checking to see if he’s legit or not. There’s a sense in this passage that they’re
not trying to trick him. Rather, because
there were several schools of thought about marriage and divorce in Jesus’ day
they’re just trying to figure out which school of thought is foundational to
his teaching. “When is divorce okay?”
they ask. Jesus responds that they are
asking the wrong question. “The question
you should be asking is this: ‘What is marriage supposed to be?’” (Steve
Godfrey, Synthesis).
It doesn’t take much
of a scholar to realize that what we often call “traditional Christian
marriage” or “tradition biblical family values” is often hard to find in the
pages of church history or Holy Scripture, and so it can be difficult looking
for grand examples in the pages of Scripture.
We have Biblical heroes married to two wives, or to a wife with a slave
mistress, or abusive husbands. We even
have Biblical heroes married to multiple wives along with hundreds of
concubines – that is mistresses. The
ideal Jesus holds up for us seems to fly in the face of the struggles we human
beings experience in trying to hold together any relationship, let alone
marriage.
In today’s Gospel lesson Jesus holds forth an
ideal focusing on what’s supposed to be a life-long partnership in
marriage. “Therefore, what God has
joined together, let no one separate.”
Yet what we don’t understand is the incredible subversive nature of Jesus’
statement! This comment is
Jesus’ response to a patriarchal world in which women’s standing could be
fragile. And while there certainly were women
of means in Jesus’ day – several of whom supported his ministry financially,
including the wife of Herod’s Steward! But
there was also an imbalance of power in favor of men. Here the Pharisees are challenging Jesus,
knowing full well that traditional interpretation of the Law allows divorce to
take place between a husband and wife – when initiated by the husband. They also know, as does Jesus, that while
Roman law allowed women to initiate divorce, only the most privileged seemed
able to exercise that right. It’s a
man’s world in first century Israel and men hold most of the cards when it
comes to such decisions about marriage.
Jesus takes this power away from his male listeners.
It’s true, though, that we’re still left with
this admonition against divorce. And
throughout the Scriptures we’re challenged by the ideal of living in life-long committed
relationships, even if few of our Biblical role models ever do so themselves. Throughout the centuries the church and
society have taken a rigidly literal understanding of this faith ideal and used
it to control women and men and their lives together. In some instances this ideal is taken to such
an extreme that divorce is seen as a greater sin than remaining in an abusive
relationship which causes emotional, psychological, spiritual, or even physical
harm to one or both of the parties. You
may even recall the news from a seminary just north of Raleigh last year where
the President was removed from office for counseling female students that it
was God’s will for them to stay in abusive marriages. That stuff still goes on today!
A simple reading of the gospels quickly reminds
us that Jesus said many tough things throughout his ministry – things that
sometimes make us scratch our heads in bewilderment - beginning with last
week’s passage about cutting off limbs or tearing out eyes, to his teaching
about hating one’s father and mother, to the overwhelming idea of taking up our
own cross and forfeiting our own lives to follow him. Jesus often makes us flinch. Many of these teachings were never meant to
be taken literally.
Rather, like many of his contemporary teachers,
Jesus uses hyperbole and harsh language to bring us up short – to shock us into
listening to the deeper truths he is trying to teach.
In this case marriage, like all relationships, is
meant to be life-giving rather than life-draining, and therefore is meant to be
taken seriously. “Our faithfulness [therefore] is demonstrated
not in complicated codes, but in how we extend God’s love and mercy to one
another—especially the ‘least of these [as pointed out by Jesus’ concern for
both women and children in his day]’” (Michaela Bruzzese).
It would do us well to recognize that much of the
Church’s and society’s attitudes towards women find their beginning in the
Garden story of Genesis 2 and 3. The
creation story, given to us literally from male-oriented translations, continue
to be used in many religious and political settings to promote a male-centered
church and a male-centered society. Even
today there are authorities who exercise power and authority over women in ways
that promote and sustain abuse. God does
not call us into, nor desire us to stay in, abusive relationships.
Images of the woman’s creation from the rib of ‘hadam,
the human one – a creature who is not yet referred to as a male person in the
original Hebrew – were meant to proclaim equality in their earliest telling. It can be frustrating as we read English translations
so many thousands of years later. The “man”
in the beginning of the story is a non-gendered being. There’s nothing there about his
maleness. And in fact, the Hebrew word, Tzela, doesn’t precisely mean “rib” but
rather “side” (Synthesis) – more like
the image of a side of beef than just a single rib. It conjures up an image of the two living
side-by-side rather than over-and-above. And side-by-side is much better unless you
desire and need to have power over someone – then, in our brokenness we embrace
the idea of the male being over-and-above! When the Hebrew is mistranslated,
then misinterpreted and finally misappropriated, the words create images of
inferiority and submission. For
thousands of years these misinterpretations have not only come at a cost for
women, but for all of humanity. And when
any part of humanity is diminished, all of humanity is diminished as well.
Words such as “helper” used in the creation story
somehow get twisted into broken realities such as “servant” or “property,” (which is one of the reasons we dropped the question "who gives this woman to this man?" in the Episcopal wedding rite. We no longer "give" a woman from one man to another - as if we ever really had that right). When this happens we
lose all sense of partnership implied in the text - all sense of inclusivity, and all sense of equality
intended in the original language. The
Hebrew words used to describe the woman as partner are different from the words
used to describe the animals earlier in the story. The words used for the woman “connote
equality; she is a helper who is a counterpart.
In this story, God is the helper superior to [the] man; the animals are
helpers inferior to [the] man; and woman is the helper equal to [the] man”
(Tribble, Eve and Adam: Genesis 2-3
Reread). Thus, out of ‘hadam,
the human one, God creates ish and ishshah – the male human
being and the female human being – partners in creation.
The time has come for these stories to stand as
models of grace-filled relationships rather than as memorials to the
patriarchal power and fear of the past.
And quite possibly such a freeing of imagination and an opening to God’s
grace will allow us to see the many different ways humanity upholds one another
and mirrors the love of God in our relationships.
Perhaps seeing our ancient stories in new ways and from different
perspectives will allow the church and society to recognize the grace and
beauty which exist around us in caring and loving relationships – caring and
loving relationships which honor the image of God in each of us.
Such ideas as these challenge each of us to look
seriously, with our whole heart and mind, both at our own attitudes and at the
ways in which we read the Biblical narrative, the stories of Scripture, in our
own time. It’s as much a matter of the
heart as it is a matter of the mind for us – even as it was for Jesus. These are stories of life and grace which
challenge our need for power and control, and which invite us into deeper, and
less literal relationships with one another and with God.
Such ideas challenge us to teach our young boys
and men to respect not just themselves, but to treat all women with dignity and
respect. Such ideas challenge us to
teach young girls and women that the image of God dwells as strong and clear in
them as it does in their male counterparts.
There are no second class citizens in the kingdom of God.
These
stories invite us to take a minute to look around us – to see the many
grace-filled relationships which touch our lives every day. These are stories that invite us to look
deeply within ourselves – and so mirror the love of God – and so be living
realities of the love of God.
