Sunday, January 19, 2014

January 19, 2014: Matthew Chapter 19

The Gospel According to Matthew Chapter 19

Originally posted January 24, 2008


General Comment: Jesus and his disciples have left Galilee for the last time and are now on the road to Judea, taking the road on the East side of the Jordan River to avoid traveling through Samaritan territory. Many people gather wherever Jesus goes, and because he is going to Jerusalem for Passover - required of all Jews as one of the three obligatory feast days, traveling pilgrims would swell the crowds. 

Matthew Chapter 19:1-12 Teaching About Divorce

In MT 5:31-32 we read the briefer teaching on divorce as part of Jesus' Sermon on the Mount, in his discussion of Torah and the need to take marriage commitment  more seriously than what Torah allowed. The debate between the early Pharisaic Schools of Hillel and Shimmai, before and during Jesus' time, demonstrate the wide disparity between conservative and liberal opinions on the grounds for which a man could  secure a divorce. Among the reasons in one opinion was that divorce was justified if the wife was not a good cook. It has been noted that there was more leniency in Galilee than Judea on this matter. However, here Matthew is more concerned about the situation within his own community. There would be special difficulties arising from the conflict within Jewish families as well as with Gentile - Greek and Roman, cultural approaches to divorce. It was necessary to have clarity on the subject of Christian divorce. Obviously Jesus would have spoken of this subject on more than one occasion. Matthew has used such teachings and adapted them for local situations. 

The setting context is a debate between Jesus and some Pharisees who have come to "test" him on the subject of divorce. It is  not necessary to automatically be suspicious of the Pharisees in these situations. Testing was something they would do among themselves as they continuously debated the finer points of Torah. For Matthew the Pharisees, who for him are now the Rabbis of the synagogues, are always the antagonists. From an historical perspective, had it not been for the Pharisees taking upon themselves the mantle of teaching Torah and tradition, Judaism might have died out, or at least it would look a lot differently today than it is.

The Pharisees ask Jesus if a man can get a divorce for any reason, without any restriction as to presumed cause (a true no fault divorce). In his answer Jesus quotes Gen. 1:27 on the creation of male and female, and bases the origin of marriage on Gen. 2:23-24 where the two become one flesh, which they were before the creation of Eve from Adam. If that is the case, the unity reestablished by marriage, Jesus says, no one should separate. By  saying this Jesus has moved the debate beyond a mere contractual family issue and placed marriage within the original creative will of God. The Pharisees counter with Moses' allowance for a man to present a certificate of divorce to his wife (see Deut. 24:1-4 for the whole context of the Pharisaic argument). Jesus counters that it was allowed by Moses only because of human hardness of heart, and that it does not make God's will null and void. Further, as in MT 5:31-32, divorce results in adultery, if the man remarries. We do not want to miss the subtle introduction here of a radical idea for Jesus' time. In saying divorce can lead to adultery, Jesus is implying that any other marriage the man may enter into while still married to his first wife (polygamy was permitted) also would be considered as adulterous. In affect the woman has been offered protection against the capricious actions of the man, and the man is given to understand the true nature of marriage as God's will, not to be taken lightly. There is an exception added by Matthew in the case of infidelity by the wife (but not by the man) which adds an element of situational ethics, a step down from Jesus' sense of God's ideal. We can only guess what Jesus would have said in such a circumstance, although his teachings on forgiveness and reconciliation may give us a clue.

The disciples see Jesus' words about divorce as reason enough to question the wisdom of marrying at all. If that is meant as a reflection on Jesus' strong position about divorce, then their words seem rather self serving. There would be those who did not marry because of their calling as prophets or missionaries. John the Baptist, Paul and Jesus would be fit that category, receiving celibacy - the ability to be and remain celibate "for the sake of the Kingdom," as a gift from God. Matthew affirms that possibility within the church as does Paul. even for women. Castration was not unknown in Jesus' time, particularly in Pagan religions. It was forbidden in Torah (Deut. 23:1) and in the early church.

Matthew Chapter 19:13-15 Jesus Blesses the Children

We have seen this lovely scene in paintings, particularly by Francis Hook. It seems a natural setting for Jesus. It reflects something of what our imagination sees in him, the kind teacher who, in his urgent mission on behalf of the Kingdom, can always take the time to stop and bless the children. We hardly have to comment on the meaning of the text were it not for the brusqueness of the disciples' reaction. One would think they had learned something about Jesus' attitude toward children from MT 18:1-5. They act like a team of bodyguards keeping the autograph seekers away from a celebrity. Even though it may be the same story as told before but from a different source, it is important to be reminded of the child's trust as a fundamental part of what it means to be a child of God. We would also do well to consider our own busyness and how easily or difficult it is to accept the serendipity nature of interruptions as possible gifts from God.

Matthew 19: 16-30 The Rich Young Man

The rich man wants to know what good deed will earn him eternal life. Instead of answering the seeker with some examples of good deeds (like a self help book giving seven steps for self improvement) he tells him to keep the commandments. We already know that for Jesus keeping the commandments is not sufficient. One's righteousness  must exceed that of the Sadducees and Pharisees, by doing more than is expected. That being the case, we can understand Jesus' response as something of a test to see how serious this man is about being part of God's Reign. He asks Jesus which commandments he should keep (how little work can I get by with). Jesus lists those dealing with human relationships, and adds one (very familiar to us) from the Holiness Code, Lev. 19:18, "...you shall love your neighbor as yourself, I am the Lord." The man has done all of this, but we might be suspicious that they were as items on the list to be done as a duty, not because his heart led him to live them. Jesus apparently was, as his  invitation to a greater level of life with God might suggest. The question is whether he is looking for one more item for the check list or is he truly serious about living differently, finding that something he is lacking in his life. Jesus invites him to sacrifice all of his ties to the material world  and to follow him. He will not. The yoke of wealth is too much of a lure, too defining of who he is and wants to remain being. He walks away grieving, knowing he has forfeited the greatest possible gift, yet powerless to break the addictive power of having, grasping, coveting instead of giving.

Jesus is sad as well. He knows the difficulty such a choice holds, even for one who has little. It is difficult, he tells his disciples, to be separated from what we allow to be the defining center of who we are. In comical exaggeration he likens it to a camel going through the eye of a needle. He knew that the rich man's wealth was that needle. The disciples are concerned, for in their culture wealth was understood as a reward for righteousness, for obeying the Law. If a rich man can't be saved then who can, they ask? No one, Jesus says. You can't save yourself, rich or poor. That's what the rich man was trying to do, to save himself by following laws, doing good deeds for the sake of being saved. But it isn't a matter of doing things. It is a matter of the heart, he says. And only God can make that change in the heart of one who turns and becomes like one of those little children Jesus blessed. If the heart is right, the deeds will follow.

Peter presses the point. What about us? We have left everything behind to follow you. What will we have? Jesus answers in the apocalyptic language of a future time, the New Age when the world is renewed, the Son of Man is on his throne, and the twelve disciples will sit in judgment of the twelve tribes of Israel. In that time beyond time, whatever was left behind will be replaced one hundred fold, and those who thought they were first by right of birth, or by an  accumulation of good deeds, or obedience to the Law will be last, and those who were last but through turning toward God, with a renewal of heart, lived each day as a blessing received and a blessing shared, will be first. Like the language of liturgy, or a lofty hymn it is not the words that matter, but the soaring spirit born of the singing.  

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Notes

1) As noted in the text of MT 19:13-15, we occasionally run across sections that seem to be the same event but written differently. These are generally the same stories taken from difference sources. The oral traditions about Jesus were alive and shared well into the first century. Most of the Gospels underwent signifigent editing, and there were probably earlier editions circulated before what we have received was completed. During the interim other traditions would be received  from Christians who moved from on place to another, and these would be incorporated into the text. We see much the same process in such books as Genesis where there are two creations stories, two Noah stories and several Abraham and Isaac stories.

2) In MT 19:21 Jesus tells the rich man that if he wants to be perfect, then he needs to sell all he has, give the proceeds to the poor and follow him. We easily misunderstand the meaning of "perfect" to be an achieved holiness, without sin, super righteousness - in other words, a Saint with a halo. That is not the meaning of the word when referring to a human being. To be perfect is to possess a sense of wholeness, a maturity of faith, a sense of already living in the Reign of God, imperfect as we are in other ways. Such a definition of perfection does not relieve us of the need to "sell all we have and give the proceeds to the poor" as it relates to our relationship with our material possessions. It calls us to a deeper responsibility to understand their proper place and use in the Christian endeavor.

No comments:

Post a Comment