monteskewed

2012-02-22T15:59:00.001+01:00

Ash Wednesday

"Until Death Do Us Part"

Today marks the beginning of Lent: the season of 40 days (not counting Sundays, roughly 6 weeks) that precede Easter Sunday. In the ancient and early Church it was a time for catechism: learning about what it meant to be a follower of Jesus (sort of like a membership class sort of thing). Catechets, or faith students, would be baptized as the sun rose on Easter Sunday, thus joining the community of faith.

Over the years things changed and developed. Lent has become a liturgical season, in which we prepare for Easter, remembering the cost, sacrifice and solidarity of Jesus of Nazareth. In the Catholic Church of the Medieval Ages it became a common practice for believers to give up things during Lent (such as fat, sugar, alcohol, etc.) to be mindful of what Jesus gave up to convince of God's radical life-transforming love. Abstinence for these roughly 40 days came to be a practice of piety in a Christian world. But abstinence enforced by the Church or the State often led to excess, hence Mardi Gras, which detracts and distracts from what faith in Christ is all about - living with faith every day.

Today we live in a post-Christian world, in which the words and life-example of Jesus of Nazareth are unknown, misunderstood, or not seen as coherent. Many leaders teach that rather than abstain from things in our lives, we should ascribe to something, take on a new practice in order to not just remember, but to proclaim, deepen and mature our faith. Such things to take on might include new prayer practices, trying got read the Bible daily, using money you'd spend on your daily latte to help others in need, or even trying to greet each person you see on the street with a smile, or don't play with or answer your smart phone while you wait in line at Trader Joe's - instead talk to someone in line near you; cook a good meal from all fresh things - taking the time to smell, touch, taste, and share it with someone else - it's an ordinary task that we ordinarily outsource to others.

Christianity proclaims the promise and passion of the incarnation - that God comes to us, that God is present in all of creation, that even the most mundane and unordinary parts of life are sanctuaries of God's extraordinary presence. Rather than abstaining to force ourselves to remember Christ's passion and the pain to which God goes to pursue us, I further that it's more effective for us to ponder, appreciate, be present in the life that's around us in order to glimpse the life that God is calling us - and all the world - to know.

2012-02-15T20:00:00.000+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, February 19^th

Mark 7:24-37

Today’s passage is rather shocking and potentially embarrassing for it shows Jesus mouthing prejudice. His comments in verse 28 seem to affirm that God loves the Jews more than the Gentiles; that he has come not for everyone but only for his people. It’s embarrassing because it seems so –un-Jesus and also flies in the face of other scriptures and historic church affirmation about Jesus coming for all peoples, nations and languages. Does this racist Jesus change his mind? Is he won over by the theological argument of the woman?; convinced by her great faith?; or merely using her as a rhetorical device in order to expound upon his version of good news?

This peculiar story, recorded only here in Mark among the four gospels, points to the reality we face today. How do we interact with others? How do we approach not only racial and social class diversity in our faith communities, but how do we encounter those among us who have a different faith story, spiritual practice, or theological viewpoint? How are we as the church called to live in our world of today, but not of it? What is great faith? What does it look like?

The text tells us that Jesus has left the Jewish lands for the Gentile ones (v. 24 Tyre) and the region of the Decapolis (v. 31 – a coalition of 10 gentile cities in what we would now call Jordan). He is a stranger in a foreign land. In last week’s passage Mark 7:1-23, Jesus bumped heads with the Jewish leaders, criticizing them for their oppressive practice of table fellowship (sharing meals) only with the most “righteous” and “pure” and their extremist, hyper-self-glorifying-piety practice of the law. Jesus continues in his gospel-long critic of the religious leaders and their establishment for :

1) their blindness [compare with Isaiah 29:9 and Mark 4:12]

2) and their inability to “read” the word of God [compare with Isaiah 29:11, Mark 2:25 and 12:10,16],

3) they let go of the command of God and hold fast to human traditions, often putting their opinions above God’s, claiming “Moses said….but we say….” (which was the traditional Rabbinical way of teaching) [Mark 7:8-10].

4) Lifting themselves up as paragons and examples of great faith.

Jesus leaves the land of holier-than-thou for the land of the dirty, un-worthy Gentile neighbors. It’s not just a question of spiritual practice but also one of race, national identity and social status, for all of those things are present when the gospels talk of those who were “Jews” and those who were “Gentiles”. And curiously enough, Jesus seems to be more welcomed, or more at home, in a foreign land of Gentiles than in Israel.

The Syrophenician Woman: Mark 7:24-30

Why does the woman come to Jesus? How does she find him when he’s trying to escape notice?

Jesus and her have a debate. He says the children (Jews) must first be fed. He compares the other children (Gentiles) with dogs. The Jews consider dogs to be unclean animals, which you would never allow in your home. The woman responds with reason, zeal for justice and faith: even dogs eat the crumbs. Her words echo the commandment of Leviticus 19:9-10 in which the Jews are commanded to leave the gleanings – or the edge of their fields – un-harvested so that the poor and the sojourners (or foreigners, or the Gentiles in Jewish lands) can eat.

She wins Jesus over with her great faith, which again is demonstrated by her trust that Jesus can heal her daughter even at a distance, for she has left her at home. (this echoes the story of the great faith of the centurion in Matthew 8:5-13).

The Deaf Man: Mark 7:31-37

In that day there were itinerant healing men who traveled and peddled their wonders. Historians tell us that they often used spittle, considered to be a body for their healing powers. [He does this again in 8:22-26 when healing a blind man, which tells us that the two stories are connected.] Here Jesus seems to conform to one practice of his day while negating another – he heals the speech and ears of a Gentile man (remember they’re in the Decapolis [map]). Once healed he’s commanded not to speak of the life-changing encounter, but others do with great zeal. Jesus makes the blind see, the dumb talk, the deaf hear. Isaiah 29:18 says “On [the day of the Lord] the deaf shall hear the words of a scroll, and out of their gloom and darkness the eyes of the blind shall see.” Jesus’ healings seem to announce the end times. But Jesus is also seemingly challenging the disciples and religious leaders to understand for they too are blind, deaf and dumb [compare with Mark 4:10-12 and 8:16-18].

· How do you respond to these texts? What do you hear God saying through them about who God is and what faith looks like?

· We’ve traditionally done evangelism assuming that we in the church know God, and those outside don’t and thus need our help. How does that agree or disagree with today’s text in which those outside the “religious” people seem to know the heart, will and word of God? How are we called to change the way we interact with our world today when we talk of God and what God has done for us in Jesus?

· How is God possibly inviting us to live out the teachings of Jesus as a community here at the crossroads of Berkeley, Oakland & Piedmont? How are needing to be healed of blindness, deafness and dumbness?

2012-02-07T22:37:00.000+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday February 12^th

Mark 7:1-23

After several striking demonstrations of miraculous healing power in the Jewish west bank of the Sea of Galilee, Mark turns to a narrative of an argument between Jesus and the Pharisees and the Scribes. Today’s sections contain 5 teachings all organized around a common theme of ritual purity. They start in 7:1, 7:9; 7:14, 7:17, and 7:20. We divide them up in a literary fashion because of the change of location, or the use of transitional words such as “and he said….”; or “Again Jesus….”

Before we study the text we need some historical reminders of things that we may have forgotten or never known. In Jesus’ day there were several principal sects (or denominations or schools of thoughts) among the Jewish believers: the Pharisees, Scribes, Sadducees, Essenes, and the Zealots (or Siccari).

The Pharisees were focused primarily upon following in the most accurate way possible the depth and width of the Jewish laws. We might call them fundamentalists in our current language. The word “Pharisee” most likely comes from a Hebrew word which means “separated one”. While they were most likely the group that worked the closest with the 99% of Jesus’ day, they also were radical in their following of the Law, to the point that they would separate themselves from all people, places and situations which may lead them to break an Mosaic Law, whether by intention or unconsciously. While the gospels always lift up the opposition between Jesus and the Pharisees, the latter were probably the closest to what Jesus taught and thought. They were most likely laymen, who probably worked six days a week at other jobs.

The Scribes were people who knew letters and who could write (their name comes from the Greek for such a literate person). Often the scribes are also called “lawyers” in our NT translations. The Scribes were most likely all Levite or priests. They had the task of interpreting the law, in particular after the postexilic times when the Jews returned to Israel after having been deported to far away, foreign Babylon. Unlike the Pharisees, they didn’t have to have other jobs as they were full-time religious leaders.

Both of them focused upon the Law and how we interpret it, live it and obey it. Curiously when the Temple of Jerusalem was destroyed by the Romans in 70AD, the Pharisees were the lone sect to survive, eventually becoming the rabbinical Judaism that we know today. Foreign to us, faith was lived out in Jesus’ day by following the Law, keeping the 10 commandments and also by being ritual pure (or set-apart from the unrighteousness of the gentiles) by not eating pork, wearing garments of more than 2 fabrics, etc. Read Deuteronomy and Leviticus for the full extent of the more than 400 laws that they observed.

Purity isn’t necessarily the first thing that we focus on when we come to church or think about faith. We worry about washing our hands before we eat, or after we get off BART or AC Transit all in order to be clean, and stay healthy. Ritual purity has a similar beginning point, even if it works out differently than we practice today because of our cultural context as well as because as followers of Jesus we no longer feel obligated to follow the intricate purity laws and detailed prescriptions detailed in the First Commandment.

Seeing the lack of ritual hygiene in his disciples, the Pharisees ask Jesus about his seemingly indifference and rejection of the diverse purity traditions of those that have gone before them in the faith. The underlying conflict between Jesus and the Pharisees is in regards to tradition and how does one most faithfully and obediently live out faith in the God of Abraham, Moses, Myriam and Ruth? How much interpretation and contextualization is allowed? In other words, how much of what we’ve traditionally affirmed can be re-interpreted in light of what we know now, as opposed to then?

Jesus takes the Scribes and Pharisees head on. He calls them hypocrites, in response to their initial passive-aggressive criticism of Jesus as a hypocrite and seemingly lax, quasi-unorthodox religious progressive. What are the five arguments that Jesus gives to challenge the established way of reading and observing the Law? Is he really lax in his religiosity? How is he re-interpreting the Laws for his day and time? Why is he doing that?

In Jesus’ day unclean people were unrighteous, to be avoided and thus also unworthy of God’s love. What is Jesus saying in response to that theological affirmation? How is Jesus defining purity and righteousness, what makes someone clean: seeking after God’s heart?

Today we face the same conundrum. How do we understand, interpret and observe the teachings of Jesus and the laws of the First Testament? How do we decide what is essential, for we all fail to observe all of what Jesus taught? Who among us gives to each person that asks (Matthew 7:7-12)? Who among us never judges another person (Matthew 7:1-6), or sins with our eyes (Matthew 5:27-30)? Michael Pollan wrote a book about the modern food industry and the difficulties we face in terms of what we eat and how bad the things are that we put in our body. He calls those choices, the Omnivore’s Dilemma.

· As followers of Jesus, what Omnivore’s Dilemma do we face?

· What is essential to you in the teachings of Jesus? How do you decide? How do you follow it or live it? How is it hard for you to do so?

· What about the teachings of Jesus is attractive and pertinent to our world today?

· How do you – and we as a church – struggle with spiritual hypocrisy? And/or live authentically what we believe?

· How is God possibly inviting us to live out the teachings of Jesus as a community here at the crossroads of Berkeley, Oakland & Piedmont? Of what do we need to repent?

2012-02-03T00:32:00.000+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday February 5^th

Mark 6:45-56

Defying Gravity

This is a curious story. The second miracles on the water – of the sea of Galilee. It echoes what we’ve already experienced in Mark 4:35-41 when Jesus calms the storm, and goes beyond it. Are they the same story edited because it’s such a good one? Or is this wonder on the water moving the disciples – and thus us: the current readers, by extension – to deeper faith?

After feeding the 5,000 Jesus does something even more radical: he defies gravity.

Why does he send them off without him? The text doesn’t directly say but it does point to the fact that Jesus wants to withdraw to a spiritual place. In Judaism, mountain tops were consistently understood and experienced as a place to encounter the presence of God. Think of Jesus receiving the 10 commandments, seeing God pass by the hole in the rock, Elijah and his miraculous sacrifice, Elijah seeing God in the silence, the transfiguration of Jesus. Jesus leaves the place of the common or the “profane” to seek out holy ground, a sanctuary away from distractions. Jesus has already done this (Mark 1:35).

But why doesn’t he invited the disciples to pray with him? Jesus’ authority and spiritual presence seems to find its source in his insistence on meditation and personal prayer: as a place of renewal, centering and active listening.

Why would he intend to pass them by? (v 49) Is Jesus trying to show them that he can walk on the water, so that they have no need to fear the waves under his feet and against which they are torturously toiling? It seems to be a revelation (epiphany) of God’s power in Jesus – for according to the First Testament only God can walk on water (Job 9:8; Psalm 77:19). Whatever it is, the intention of Jesus can’t have been to walk past them or ignore them, for he goes onto the lake to find them. The curious twist in the story is that his miraculous presence rather then encourage the worn-down disciples, terrifies them.

What don’t they understand about the loaves? They seem to be fixated upon Jesus as just a wonder-worker doing miraculous things. Distracted by the bling, they fail to make the connection between the mysterious meal of abundance and Jesus walking on water and the inherent fact that Jesus is more than just a wonder-worker. Their hearts are hardened, and so not open to the truth, to seeing Jesus for who he is. Ironically that’s the exact criticism that Jesus’ declared enemies receive in Mark 3:5 and 10:5).

Why are their hearts hardened? In Mark 4:12 and 8:18 their eyes are closed. Do they suffer from an inability to see who Jesus truly is, or is it that they are unwilling to do so? The words point back to the Exodus story – and another miraculous crossing of a sea – in which God hardens Pharaoh’s heart (Exodus 7:3 & 13).

The end of the periocope tells of the faith of those seeking miracles in Jesus. It’s easy to imagine the scene and the desperation of the sick and broken who have no access to modern medicine, let alone an HMO or state health care plan. They believe in him and the power that seems to emanate even just for a mere physical touch of his clothing, his body or his aura. Whereas such faith isn’t seemingly sufficient for the inner-circle of the disciples, here Jesus doesn’t criticize a faith that looks principally and primarily for miracles. by Jesus, so hungry for his words and thirsty for his wisdom that they forgot to think ahead and pack food? That seems a stretch. Were they just selfish, not wanting to share with each other? Or is Mark implying that the people didn’t have anything but their yearning for a different life (a bit like the Israelites thirsting for liberation from their slavery in Egypt)?

What’s this story all about? Are we called to walk on water? I’ve tried it, have you? I can’t do it. Is it a reminder that we’re not God? It is a challenge to move beyond our human limits? As I reflect on this the words of the climatic song of the musical Wicked, “Defying Gravity” [video] :

“Something has changed within meSomething is not the sameI'm through with playing by the rulesOf someone else's gameToo late for second-guessingToo late to go back to sleep It's time to trust my instinctsClose my eyes: and leap! It's time to tryDefying gravity I think I'll tryDefying gravityAnd you can't pull me down!”

The wicked witch (Elphaba) has seen behind the curtain of the infamous wizard. All of her expectations and preconceived ideas have crumbled. She has to re-see the world and her place in it.

· How are you – and we as a church – called to hearts that are soft and eyes that are open?

· What keeps you from believing that Jesus is God – not just a miracle worker – but the God of the universe that loves us so much that he would cross the lake to get into the boats of our lives?

· Jesus taught that with faith we [his followers] can move mountains, or defy gravity. Do you try to do so? Why? Why not? What does Jesus mean by that?

· How is God possibly inviting us to respond with our gifts, passion and creativity to the needs of the world, by joining in to what God is already doing?

2012-01-25T21:03:00.001+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, January 29^th

Mark 6:30-44

This pericope (section of the gospel) seems to be perfect for us as we gather today for worship and our shared ministry work of discernment, discipleship and rededication as a community of faith at our annual congregational meeting. Mark tells this story in juxtaposition with the story of the horrific feast at which the 1% of ancient Palestine gorge themselves at the table of Herod Antipas and punctuate the debauchery with the beheading of John the Baptizer all for a king to avoid shame and his mistress to exact revenge on a too courageous prophet. (Mark 6:14-29)

In the larger scheme of Mark’s retelling of the Jesus story, we see that these two contrasted stories about feasts follow Jesus sending out the twelve disciples to do ministry (Mark 6:6-13). On one hand it’s remarkable that he would dare to do so: the disciples seem so clueless: They were terrified by Jesus’ calming of the story (Mark 5:35-41). They don’t seem to get the parables and basic teachings of Jesus about the Kingdom of God (Mark 4:10). And yet on the other hand, Jesus has redefined family – the principal thing in terms of identity in the ancient world. Family isn’t about your family name, your gender, your tribe; but rather it’s about who you follow and how you follow them in your life. For Jesus, anyone who follows God, seeking to do God’s will in the world, is part of his family. So in the end the disciples might not be 100% clear on what’s going on, but they get the big picture (even if not very clearly). They too seek to know God, to follow God, and to do God’s will in the world. Maybe we ourselves are not all that different than the disciples today?

Mark starts off in v 30 by finishing the story of the sending out of the disciples. They return to their master, telling him what has been done and taught. This great crowd comes to Jesus because of what they have said and done. It’s their witness – the use of their gifts in the world – that gathers, attracts and invites people to come and experience the presence, purpose and power of Jesus for themselves. While Jesus wants his friends to rest and to be renewed, they are all overwhelmed by the physical hunger, spiritual thirst and social needs of the faceless crowds that follow them.

Mark tells his version of the great feast of the 5,000 differently than the other gospel writers (Matthew 14:13-21, Luke 9:10-17 & John 6:5-13). Mark seems to retell the story with the intention of invoking the Exodus story and the wandering of the Israelites in the desert Mark alone describes that this meal happened in a lonely, remote, or deserted place (6:31, 32 & 35), which brings to mind the feeding of Israel in the wilderness in Exodus 16. The reference to Israel being like sheep without a shepherd (v 34) also serves as an intertextual echo to what was said of the generation that wandered in the wilderness after the Exodus (Numbers 27:17 & Ezekiel 34:1-31). Even the way the crowd is organized in groups of 50s and 100s recalls Moses’ organizing of Israel in Exodus 18:21.

Though they’re in a deserted place, it’s not a desert: empty of resources. (v 36 “nearby towns”, 39 “green grass”). There is not enough money to feed the people. Towns are too far. When they gather what they have to eat, it’s only 5 loaves of bread and 2 fish. [The gospel of John says the lunch belongs to a boy, while here Mark implies that the provisions belong to the disciples.] Curiously, there are no details on the mechanics of how the miracle happens. There is nothing. And then, when the disciples distribute the gifts of food, there is more than enough.

The people are too far from town to go for provisions and return. Were they so entranced by Jesus, so hungry for his words and thirsty for his wisdom that they forgot to think ahead and pack food? That seems a stretch. Were they just selfish, not wanting to share with each other? Or is Mark implying that the people didn’t have anything but their yearning for a different life (a bit like the Israelites thirsting for liberation from their slavery in Egypt)?

What do you think happened? Did Jesus’ blessing somehow multiply and transform a small amount of food into a gigantic beyond-our-imagination (or eschatological) feast? Or, as the 19^th century critic H. E. G. Paulus argued, nothing truly supernatural is being described here; some members of the crowd, having secretly brought food with them, were shamed by Jesus’ example of openhearted generosity into sharing it with the others. Whether it’s a miracle of multiplication or of a moving of the heart, there are signs of something unique, pointing back to the Exodus and forwards in time towards the day of the Lord when God’s goodness will overcome the world. 5 loaves + 2 fish = 7 foodstuffs – the number of divine perfection in the Bible. There are 12 baskets of left-overs, as there were 12 tribes of Israel.

I think this miracle story is about living out our faith in a missional community. The disciples don’t not what to do when they are faced by the great need, hunger and thirst in their world. Jesus responds to their plea for guidance (v 36) by inviting them to be part of the solution, an essential part of what God is doing in the world (v 37-38). Jesus couldn’t have multiplied the loaves and fishes for the crowd if the disciples hadn’t first 1) gone out to preach and thus attract new people to Jesus, 2) returned to Jesus as their center and master, 3) sought out the gifts that they had among them as a starting place for how Jesus – and God – could respond to the needs of their world and context. They looked for a quick fix to the problem of no food. Jesus invited them to look deeper – to see how God had already gifted them to join into the good work (the will of God) that God was and is doing in the world.

We often are like the disciples - thinking that God will send someone else, assuming that we don't have anything to offer that can make a difference, envisioning doing mission (or the Will of God) as something we fund for the "professionals" to do as opposed to something that we too can join in and work towards. Maybe we need to change that? Maybe that disempowered way of thinking is what all too often disempowers the church and keeps us from living out our faith in an integrative, passionate and impassioning way?

How are you – and we as a church – gifted?

What hungers, thirsts and needs do you see around us in Berkeley and Oakland?

How is God possibly inviting us to respond with our gifts, passion and creativity to the needs of the world, by joining in to what God is already doing?

2012-01-13T12:00:00.000+01:00

Bumper Sticker of the Week

2012-01-13T08:36:00.000+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, January 8^th

Mark 6:14- 29

As I read this pericope (section of the gospel) it seems to be about authenticity and boldness. How far are we called to go in standing for what we believe to be right? How bold are we in proclaiming what we believe to be true, right, gospel-good-news? Do we proclaim it with just words, or do we do so with all of our lives and livelihoods? In a world that often is toxically tainted by hypocrisy, polished messages, photoshopped images and smooth talkers who promise everything, I’ve been told to not lose my head. No one expects you to go that far in doing what you think, or what the Bible says. And yet in a world that’s bankrupt of belief in promises made – whether that be by politicians, bankers, bosses, union leaders or clergy – aren’t we all looking for some sort of authenticity that’s organically earned by doing what is preached and promised? In my life, I first had a transformational faith experience as an adolescent when I encountered and dialogued with people – principally adults who weren’t in my nuclear DNA based family – who actually did what they believed and what Jesus taught. It was experiencing that radicalness that shaped and reshaped me.

Mark writes this third major section of his literary re-telling of the gospel, which scholars say starts in 6:6b, in a format that contrasts two feasts: this one in which the beheading of one person: John the Baptizer in a sense as entertainment for those who no longer hunger for food because they have enough to eat; with a miraculous meal in which Jesus somehow feeds thousands of hungry with one person’s picnic lunch Mark 6:30-44.

It’s a transitional section. Jesus has gone out and gotten famous as a radical teacher. And yet at home no one can see him for who he is outside of his family and their history. He sends out his followers, not just to invite folks to a block party, but to do radical things in his name. His authority is one that’s shared, collaborative, growing, organic, catchy. As his fame and following grows, Mark takes the time to show how John the Baptizer, who came first in terms of popularity as a radical proclaimer of a different social order and authentic community organizer, exits the stage.

Herod Antipas (for that’s who he really was) has been repeatedly attacked in public by John as a sinner. The king of Israel, or the puppet ruler place by the all mighty imperial power of Rome (depending upon how you saw it) was the son of Herod the Great (who was jealous of the birth of Jesus as foretold to him by the Magi). John had preached against him, pointing out publicly his sinfulness: he had married his half-brother’s wife, who was also his niece. But it gets worse, Herod Antipas then lusts after his step-daughter, succumbing in a sense to peer pressure. She dances so well, in whatever her outfit was, to entice him to promise her anything. She doesn’t ask for the kingdom, but rather for the head of the guy who had rallied publicly against her mother as an incestuous, class-climbing harlot. Herod seems to have hesitated to have him beheaded, recognizing that it was wrong, but not having enough of a backbone to go against the way in which he had been trapped publicly by this young girl and his lustful sex drive.

Herod is terrified. He hears of the wonderous works and mighty miracles of Jesus and his followers and he freaks out: is John back from the dead? Is John coming for him? His fear seems to be more about his own guilt, than his impression of Jesus and the community of revolutionaries that he’s gathering through his teaching and speaking.

If the gospel and the narratives of the Bible are stories and also metanarratives that teach about the meaning, sense and purpose of life, we have to ask what does this text have intend for us existentially and spiritually? I’ve never had anyone beheaded, and realistically don’t see my power, or muscle strength, growing enough to do so. And yet I, like Herod Antipas, also do what seems more and most expedient at times: please other people, do what others want, take the easy way out in a conflict situation. I too often respond out of fear, insecurity, the fear to please – overwhelmed by my own baggage to the point that I don’t see or hear what’s right before me.

The difference between Jesus, and the feast he serves, and Herod Antipas and the feast he hosts – is that Jesus is really in the now – the present of the meal. He’s aware of what’s going on, the hunger of his guests, the way in which the world need to be fed. John the Baptizer was also in touch with that. He spoke out against Herod’s weak example as a leader and inappropriate lazy and self-serving use of his power. I think Herod knows what’s right, that he recognizes the inherent wrongness in his marriage to his niece and lust for his step-daughter (who’s also a distant cousin). Yet he, unlike John, doesn’t have enough of a back bone to authentically claim and live out what is right, what invites to life for him and for others. He wants what he wants and he also wants to be adored, heralded as a paragon and looked to as a great man.

I – and I mean we – do the same thing. We often want to please others, to be recognized for our efforts, to be looked to and after. Yet in a society in which the problems and ills are so apparent and the solutions and peacemakers so hard to discern, if they’re not invisible, why do we settle for such inauthencity? Jesus invites us to recognize who we are and to see what God has given us and to use it to serve our neighbor and God; and to give and receive love in doing so.

How are we inauthentic in the ways in which we live out what we base our life upon – whether it’s the teachings of Jesus, Karl Marx, Adam Smith, JP Sartre, or George Washington?

If we are indeed the solution to the problems we face (as many would say), why do we so often flee the conflict inherent in those same problems?

How is God in Christ calling us to be a authentic in the way that we live out what we base our life and livelihood upon in Oakland and Berkeley?

2012-01-07T01:30:00.000+01:00

Bumper Sticker of the Week

2012-01-06T23:16:00.001+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, January 8^th

Mark 6:1-13

We return to the Gospel of Mark after a Christmas hiatus to a challenge of Jesus’ identity and legitimacy. The texts begins with several linguistic cues that things are going to change. Whenever there is a geographical switch in the gospels, that’s to say a movement from one place to another, it’s not just topography that’s in view.

Jesus leaves the places where the crowd gathered around him on the lakeshore (5:21) – sacred place where he encountered the anonymous bleeding woman and the dying daughter of the notable Jairus. He leaves this place where many who did not know him encountered his miraculous and magnanimous presence, which not only turned their heads but quite possibly transformed their lives. He leaves there to return home: to the places of his fathers, ancestors – “his people” – those that know him the best, or think that they do.

The people of Nazareth are amazed at the authority of Jesus’ teaching (just like others elsewhere see 1:22; 1:45 45 & 2:12). Yet then there perspective changes. They remember him: who his family is, maybe about his bizarre birth, weird paternal claims, and maybe occasional bizarre occurrences. Your hometown is often a place that feels like “home” where everybody knows your name….as the “Cheers” theme song said. AND it’s also a place where everybody knows your business and thinks that they know your place.

Ancient Palestine, including Nazareth, was a society based first and foremost upon patriarchal family relationships. Social roles and relationships were based upon who you belonged to: your family, your village, your tribe. What’s curious is that Jesus returns to his hometown not with his family, but with his posse, a new community of his disciples (who he has already called his family in Mark 3:31-35). Jesus has challenged the social norms by redefining family from a genetic definition to the inclusion of anyone and everyone who does the will

of God or puts the teachings of Jesus into practice.

Is it any wonder then that things quickly go sour. After their initial amazement his former neighbors, like the lady who ran the corner store, or that crossing-guard, or the old guy down the block (to use modern American terms), respond by saying “Hey! Wait a minute. We know this guy.” And it’s not just roses. He’s identified as Mary’s son, not Joseph’s. This is curious in patriarchal, male-based society. Are they referring to the virgin birth? Or is it a back-handed slight, an easily made slur against Jesus’ legitimacy?

They can’t get past who Jesus is, or maybe what Jesus has said. He’s just the carpenter’s son. What would he know about God and life? All of his siblings are named (Jesus alone isn’t named after someone in the Bible). How is Jesus compared to them? Is he the black sheep, overlooked for the 99?

Jesus quotes what is most likely a common saying, “Only in his hometown, among his relatives and in his own house is a prophet without honor.” Curiously it’s only here in Mark’s retelling of the event (6:4) that this list include “by his own family or relatives, compare it to Matthew 13:37 and John 4:44. Is this pericope (gospel section) saying that a prophet is defined not by being a seer who can see God’s plans in and for the future, but rather a prophet is defined more by rejection? Can you have a popular prophet that everyone loves and adores?

Plutarch (a famous Roman) wrote in 604 CE “You would find that the most sensible and wisest people are little cared for in their hometowns”. It’s nearly the same statement. What is it about our hometowns, or our home turfs that impeded us from often seeing ourselves – and each other – clearly?

The people not only doubt him, they take offense at him (v. 5). In the Greek they’re “scandalized” by him – they fall away from faith because of what they see in or around him. The people in the town – his town – react to Jesus in the same way as the scribes and religious leaders in 3:20-30. They recognize that he can do amazing miraculous works of power. But they won’t ascribe that to God’s power in or through Jesus. Their faith is like that of the seed planted in the rocky places Mark 4:17. Why is that? Was Jesus actually a loser, a nothing special guy, who Mark and the other gospel writers made out to be someone extraordinary through good literary editing? Or were they blind to who Jesus was and what he was about?

Jesus moves on. He doesn’t remain captive to their limited and twisted expectations of him. He arrives home where his neighbors are amazed at him (6:2) and he leaves home amazed at their lack of faith (6:6). He turns to his new family, his new “hometown” composed of those on the road of faith, seeking to do God’s will: the disciples. And he sends them out in his name with his authority. Jesus doesn’t trap them in particular roles or limitations, but empower and liberates them to be partners, collaborators with him in his ministry.

How are we often blinded to what God is doing around us, much like those folks in Nazareth were blinded to what God was doing in Jesus?

How do our expectations and history with each other, put blinders on our eyes when we come together, work together, or dream together?

How do we need – do you need – to be freed from such expectations?

Who are the prophets in our world today? Why do we listen to them? When do we not listen to them?

How is God in Christ calling us to be a prophetic witness in Oakland and Berkeley, pointing to what God wants for our world, societies, cities, lives and communities?

2012-01-05T06:40:00.002+01:00

My Top 10 Reasons For Why I Love Oakland

Oakland is the infamous ugly step-sister city to the Cinderella post-card perfection of San Francisco. Novella Carpeter, [her blog] one of the most recently famous Oaklanders because of her urban foodie efforts and recent book, coined this fairytalesque metaphor for my favorite city. In 2011 the Town (as opposed to the “City” as we Nor Cal-ers call San Francisco) was made famous by the indecisiveness of our mayor Jean Quan and the destructive thuggery of our non-native majority occupiers confronted with violence by our friendly neighborhood police department. While the Oakland all too often only gets a bad rap, it’s much like Brooklyn is to Manhattan: the place the Cultural Creatives, hipsters and Bobos call home while they do their thing.

10. The YMCA

9. The Weather

8. The Views

7. The Parks

6. It’s a Foodie Shrine

5. It’s an Urban Farming Mecca

4. Failing Successful Public Education

3. Urban Grit: Lake Merritt

2. Urban Graffiti Art & Politics: Oaklandish & The Grand Lake Theater Marquee

1. The People

10. The YMCA

Of everything I've experienced in Oakland I think that the Downtown Oakland YMCA on Broadway is perhaps the best image and metaphor of Oakland. Diverse people gathered together to work out and seek greater health, have fun, build community and invest in the community of Oakland. You see every body type from overly thick to marathon-runner thin, every shade of skin color, babies to octogenarians, yoga disciples to body builders, swim lesson kids to very large bodied adults wanting to soak in a jacuzzi. Activities range from spin classes to dance classes, from groups meeting for dinner to night-out kid-friendly activities for parents desperate to have a night off. And the membership costs are on a sliding scale, ensuring that everyone has access that they can afford, and then those that are able can chose to financially empower others to be a part of the community too. It's Oakland at its best.

9. The Weather

While Oakland didn’t make the 10 best weather-ed cities in America on Farmer’s Almanac, it is commonly considered, in our Town, to be the city with the most moderate weather in the USA. Temperatures range from the 40s to the 80s. And while San Francisco is inundated with near freezing fog in August each year, I’m always able to grow beautiful, large heirloom tomatoes in my garden. No humidity. No freezing. No need for an air-conditioner, and I know some families that have never spent the money to fix their broken furnaces, seeing no need to do so.

8. The Views

I was as at the Oakland Zoo recently and reminded of the amazing views of Oakland that I take for granted every day. Where else can you drive through an inner-city context and then be in a Redwood forest within 15 minutes without taking a freeway or leaving the city? I love the diversity of Oakland: people, food, shopping, body types, music, art...and the topography, geography and views. Here are my top 8:

8.1. Inner-city to Redwood Forest back to the Urban Jungle: Start at 880 & 35th Avenue. Drive up 35th over and past the 580 as it becomes Redwood Road. At the top of the hill, turn left on Skyline, stay left at the fork onto Joaquin Miller Road and continue down. At 580 it becomes Lincoln Ave., later it's Champion Street (at MacArthur) there turn right onto MacArthur then left onto Fruitvale and follow it back to the 880. Great driving view of the city.

8.2. View of the Hills and the whole bay are from the Sky Ride at Oakland Zoo (worth the $2.50 on a clear day).

8.3. View of the city from the rooftop of the Oakland Kaiser Parking Lot (free if you leave within 30 minutes)

8.4. View of it all while circling Lake Merritt

8.5. View of the rooftops of the urban jungle, including church spires, looking towards the hills from the Elliptical Machine Room at the YMCA on Broadway

8.6. View anywhere within Middle Harbor Shoreline Park

8.7. From the Mormon Temple parking lot (both SF and Oakland downtowns line up together)

8.8. At the top of Hiller Drive above the Claremont

7. The Parks

This piggy backs on the views, but is indeed distinct. In my neighorhood, or hood, the local park has a beautiful ball diamond nearly always in use in the spring and summer. The playground area is nice, albeit the sand is punctuated with used condemns, cigarette buds and your occasional needle. There’s a reason we don’t take our children there very often, even though it’s the only place we can walk on foot. But from that city park to the regional parks there are amazing places to go. Urban renewal parks based in the historical past (like Peralta Hacienda) to handicap accessible brand spankin’ new playgrounds in the redwood forest (like Redwood Regional Park) to a great place to find a nanny – even if you’re not looking for one (Avenue Terrace Playground, in local speak “Jordan Park”), all the way to Lakeside Park at Lake Merrit where you can always find a pick-up soccer game on a field covered in Geese poo. The parks are the places where everyone in Oakland mixes together, in spaces that represent the breadth, wealth and poverty of our great urban salad bowl mixing pot.

6. It’s a Foodie Shrine

While the City across the Bay is known for food as a near Paris-equal in Northern California, it’s actually in Oakland that most new hipster foodie chefs are setting up restaurants, mainly because it’s cheaper. From crazy good mac-n-cheese at a place that was sued by McDonalds because they wanted to use the name “Little Mac” [Homeroom] to the numerous emergences of foodie spots born from the tsunami of Alice Waters' nearby Chez Panisse to the numerous culturally diverse places like the proliferation of Ethiopian Restaurants and the Soul Food restaurants that have a near constant line out the door, to the nearly worshipped fried chicken sandwiches consumed on ironing boards at Bakesale Betty – Oakland should be known more as a place to eat than as the middle-sized city with the most consistently high murder rate.

5. It’s an Urban Farming Mecca

This piggy backs on the Foodie bit (see Novella Carpenter’s Novel “Farm City”). Raising backyards chickens or expanding your own backyard bee hive is not an oddity, but almost like a peer pressure given for parts of Oakland. On a walk this morning in a neighborhood where the average house price is over $850,000 I saw a beautiful home-built chicken coop alongside a driveway filled with a fabulous Lexus. In fact chikens are no big deal, now to be a real legit Oakland urban farmer you need to be keeping pigs, rabbits and goats, and be into slaughtering and preparing them for homemade feasts with good friends. An irony when so many go so hungry on our streets, it’s a testament to a certain resilience, in particular as the most famous farms are in the worst hoods.

4. Failing Successful Public Education

When it comes to Oakland there's a lot of say about education. The power of Oakland Unified School District was just returned to the city after exiting receivership and a take over (sometimes hostile) by the State of California. When you talk with people leaving Oakland, or thinking about making that choice, it's almost always around schools and/or crime. I've blogged a lot on it, torn from the challenges of education our children in public schools in the city, excited and at times overwhelmed by the inequity and systemic stuck-ness.

And it's not just OUSD that educates our children. We've been part of a cooperative preschool community for several years. As we leave that space and community I'm reminded that it does take "a village to raise a child." That we've been blessed to have our two children loved and known by other kids and families, and for our family to love and know other children and families. The diversity (cultural, class, financial, educational) of our city is amazing and shows up in our kids. It's also a huge challenge to those that work in education. How to you meet, respond to, let alone simply articulate the myriad needs that exist.

I've been repeatedly amazed by the passion of those who work in education in Oakland, life-long commitments (in many cases to the city that they grew up in) of educators to empowering the citizens of Oakland. Heroes for me, who recognize the sickness and stuck-ness of the system yet refuse to be complacent, hopeless or apathetic. They form a great cloud of witnesses I think of when I lose hope. Their example lifts me up to push on to finish the race we all are running together as a city community: Gary and Caroline Yee, Di-Di, Gail Murphy, Brook Pessin, Mel Stenger, Misato Araki, Mary Grace McGhee, Amelia Bailey, and Doug Feague. We should be hearing more about such heroes as a city. Katy Murphy at the Oakland Tribune does this to some extent on her blog: The Education Report

3. Urban Grit: Lake Merritt

It wouldn't be Oakland without Lake Merritt. It stinks and still we go. It's been covered with signs, walls, construction stuff for months yet still the sidewalks and lake banks are filled with frolickers, runners, walker-pushers and tai chi doers. Located in the middle of the city it's a perfect living metaphor for the beautiful complexity that Oakland is: crime, skylines, the hills, parks, the new cathedral, urban decay that shows us not so much that beauty is in the beholder, but that each thing is beautiful.

Located on the edge of downtown and connected to the bay, it's probably the most iconic image of Oakland. Each day begins with numerous boot campers working out around the lake at the east end and on the stairs as the sun rises, and ends with folks enjoying breath-taking views of the city at sunset (usually admiring the fog located across the bay in our more famous sister city). Is it any wonder that the Lake has been taken over by the immigrant Canadian Geese and their excrement? Maybe that too is an appropriate metaphor for the challenges that face our city: beauty that invites and which in the invitation creates the problems that keep the city from becoming the beauty it’s destined to be.

2. Urban Graffiti Art & Politics: Oaklandish & The Grand Lake Theater Marquee

Founded in 2000, Oaklandish is community of artists | renegades | organizers which has got to be one of the most under-noticed political gathering powers of Oakland. Their t-shirts are everywhere, worn with great pride.

Their great website says it all, in particular with the home page that directs you to shopping and/or community. I believe that Oaklandish does more than our Mayor and City Council to increase civic pride, empower civic activism, and generate good energy for our always-struggling city.

The marquee at the historic movie theatre The Grand Lake (just off Lake Merrit) is undoubtedly the town's un-official official political gathering point. Whether it's driving by on Highway 580 (the sign is made for such political perspective) or walking Grand Ave, the marquee booms out an invitation to political dialog in a way that is unabashedly liberal and poignantly direct. Allen Michaan, owner since 1980, is also political in his business plan not enforing R ratings on movies by Michael Moore in order to empower teens to expand their political perspective through film. He also offers free showings for minors when a left-leaning documentary is playing.

1. The People

The people are what are the best thing about Oakland: diverse, different, divergent, dangerous, daring, damaged and dapper. While our professional sports teams are always looking for greener grass – or astro-turf – elsewhere, many people that have not only survived but thrived in the Oakland crime, schools, blight and bliss are what makes this Town my favorite city. For me, blogger Corn Dog best represents the realistic existential beauty of the people of Oakland.

I started blogging several years ago through an ongoing conversation in a Peer Pastors Learning Group. Bruce Reyes-Chow encouraged me to take the plunge. I started blogging, thinking that it could expand my ministry work at the church I served by empowering deeper and wider dialog (and an actual discussion instead of a "speaking at the congregation") about the scriptures texts in worship on Sunday mornings. I also imagined it as a great avenue for education and participation. Little did I know that Corn Dog, a neighbor of the church and quite possibly one of the most vibrant and least public of the residents of both the Dimond District and Oakland, would teach me much about blogging and about being an urban resident committed to justice, equity and transformation of the hood for good (as opposed to merely aiming for higher property values).

Here's what I love about Corn Dog (and Mr. Corn Dog too!) as they are the best representations of the people of Oakland in my experience:

She loves Oakland. We say that a lot. But she really does. She loves the dirty and the gritty, the messy and the urban-decay-stuff-we-want-to-overlook and deny.

She loves the people: not just the beautiful ones, but maybe even more so the crazies. It's often that she buys food for folks on the street. She knows all the street people in the Dimond (and well beyond) by first name and life-story. She considers them to be her neighbors too, ones that she is called to love in word and deed.

She is a connection-maker. She knows everyone on the street - not just the street people - she knows the business owners, employees, etc. - by name. She doesn't live in the hood. She lives in her hood.

She is an amazing technology-using-communicator. She creates and publishes more than you know in terms of paper and e-marketing/communication in the Dimond and greater Oakland. She taught me a lot about blogging, writing and the connections that we can not only make but also mature online. She also stood with me, having my back, when I got involved (not as much as she did) in the messy union-related tuff around Farmer Joe's a couple of years ago.

She knows and embodies the words GENEROSITY and SOLIDARITY more than anyone I've ever met. I spend my days talking about what it means to love unconditionally, inclusively, as God first loves us in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. I may be a good "talker" about that. Corn Dog lives it.

Corn Dog should probably be voted Oakland Resident #1. She should definitely win, or at least be on, Jean Quan's Local Heroes list. Of course even if she won she'd never show up to receive the prize or the praise. You may not know her by name - but odds are you've seen her - walking her canine children through the Dimond, contemplating the giant Jesus at the Mormon Temple Center, at the monthly Dimond Peace Vigil [first Sunday of the month at 7pm at the corner of Champion and MacArthur] or riding the 57 bus. I used to see her most days walking the hood and loved encountering her daily online before she changed things up. The Corn Dogs embody the best of Oakland and the best that it can become. It’s all about the people.

2012-01-04T05:07:00.001+01:00

Monteskewed Moving Soon to a New Blog Site

I'm working on creating a new blog on a different url. I'll be moving in the next few weeks. As I'm working I'm imagining that I'll blog about the following things:

Oakland

Oakland Public Schools or Raising a child in a Public Urban School

Foodie Things

Urban Gardening

Blogging Towards Sunday through Scripture

Reflections on the Church in the 21st century

Bumperstickers

If you read the blog what do you like? Is there something else that I should include, or maybe something I should eliminate?

2011-12-17T17:44:00.000+01:00

Bumper Sticker of the Week

2011-12-17T02:57:00.001+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, December 18^th

Mark 5:21-42 | Luke 1:26-38 | Luke 1:47-55

The Fourth Sunday of Advent:
3 Women | Prince | God's Radical Love

Jesus and his friends return to Israel after their failed (or was it?) effort to proclaim the gospel good news on the other side of the Sea of Galilee (the Gentile Side, present day Syria and Jordan). As he returns to his land, his people and his culture, he’s met with overwhelming needs, hopes and prayers. Our Mark passage today focuses upon a chiastic story: a story (of the bleeding woman who comes to Jesus) sandwiched within another story (the dead girl, whose father comes to him for help). This was a customary Jewish way of telling stories and writing, a lot like we look for a tight relationship between an introduction and a conclusion. The contrast between these two women in need of healing and wholeness is also paralleled by the Lectionary texts in Luke 1 which lift up the story of Mary, another woman that God seeks out to involve in his company’s radical idea of a Christmas Party: a reversal of the way things are done in the world. Today’s texts invite us to take a closer look at the world at Christmas: God comes into the world not to condemn it, but to heal, liberate and transform it. Are we then called to flee it, conform to it, or engage it?

What’s the rock star Prince got to do with it?

The 80s rock star Prince, often condemned for overtly sexual lyrics and actions, is commonly recognized as a musical composer, albeit in a different style than Bach or Mozart. A song of his “Let’s Get Crazy” lifts up the theme that I see underneath our three scriptures: the incarnation :: God’s radical commitment to our world. Here are the beginning lyrics of that rock song:

“Dearly beloved; We are gathered here today; 2 get through this thing called life.

Electric word life; It means forever and that's a mighty long time; But I'm here 2 tell u; There's something else; The afterworld | A world of never ending happiness; U can always see the sun, day or night

So when u call up that shrink in Beverly Hills; U know the one - Dr Everything'll Be Alright; Instead of asking him how much of your time is left; Ask him how much of your mind, baby

'Cuz in this life; Things are much harder than in the afterworld

In this life; You're on your own”

Granted this is a rock song meant to dance to, yet it lifts up some of the challenges that we face in urban life: the difficulty in day-to-day survival, in particular in a context that is more comfortable than those facing starvation in Ethiopia or Sudan. Yet how do we look at life? Are we on our own? Do we just need to suck it up and live carpe dieum to the max to find happiness here below? Is the “good life” only in the hereafter? What does being alive today mean? How does our life and actions bring meaning to the universe?

In Mark 5, we see the peripatetic (not pathetic!) life style of Jesus. That adjective means 1) an itinerant person who walks and travels about; 2) it also refers to those that follow Aristotelian (from the Greek Aristotle) school of philosophy, based upon the notion of journeying to reflect upon life. Jesus seems to make meaning of life, to teach and encounter the world by journeying – literally walking around – in it. His is not a removed life of reflective distance, but an up-close, encountering the down and dirty aspects of life prophetic role. That’s what the incarnation is: God comes to us to convince us of God’s radically transformative and liberating love.

the bleeding woman:

While setting out to heal the synagogue ruler’s daughter (one of the notables or 1%) Jesus is touched in a crowd by an anonymous woman, who we learn is unclean according to the Mosaic law because of her menstrual bleeding which has lasted for 12 years! [Leviticus 17:10-14 & Deuteronomy 12:23] This was a bit mysognistic but also because the ancients believed that the “life force” – the thing that means you’re alive – what we mean when we say “the soul” – was contained in the blood. Because she’s unclean she’s in supposed to reside outside of the camp/town/village until she’s healed and thus ritually clean. The problem is that after 12 years she doesn’t seem any closer to wholeness. Because she’s unclean she is banished from society, the synagogue where she might pray, her family and life in general. If she touches someone then they too become ritually unclean. So she’s going against the law in sneaking into the crowd, touching innumerable people and intentionally touching Jesus. Did you catch her name? Me neither. A person without a name isn’t a person in human culture. But rather than condemning her, Jesus gives her a new name – what is it? Why does he call her that? What does it mean..for her? For the crowd? In response to his teaching on family in Mark 3:31-35? The word Greek word used in v. 28 & 29 for healing also means “to be saved”. How does Jesus save her?; us?

the dead girl:

Jairus’ daughter almost seems like an after thought. She dies before he can get there because of the encounter with the bleeding woman. Jesus says another funny thing (like who touched me?) – “She’s not dead merely sleeping.” It’s eschatological irony, pointing to the way in which God wants to make all things new, a way of looking beyond present appearances to what God will make happen in the future. Is she really dead?; merely sleeping? She must be dead as they’re mourning her. Jesus raises her from the dead, a resurrection similar in a sense to his own. He tells her to “get up”. In Greek the word is egeiro! Which can also means “be resurrected” or “return to new life”! How does Jesus free and heal this daughter? How is she similar and different to the bleeding woman?

How do you hear God inviting you to freedom, wholeness and love in these texts?

How does the peripatetic God journey with us in Christ? Today? How are we called to also be peripatetic in the way that we love all of our neighbors as God loves us?

The message of Christmas is that “we’re not on our own!” How is that revolutionary today?

2011-12-08T06:08:00.003+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, December 11^th

Mark 5:1-20 | Isaiah 61:1-4, 8-11 | John 1:6-8, 19-28

The Third Sunday of Advent: Deliverance

Jesus and his friends arrive on the other side (the Gentile Side, present day Syria and Jordan) of the Sea of Galilee after the rapidly arising storm in which the messianic power of Jesus is demonstrated to the disbelief of the disciples (Mark 4:35-41). Arriving in a foreign land, Jesus is surprisingly accosted by a foreign occupying power. The third Sunday of Advent is the “joy” Sunday, focusing on the joy of the reversal of the depressing and destructive power of evil in the world in the light of the birth of the Christ Child. Yet is liberation always good news? Does freedom always bring us joy?

Jesus and the occupy movement

Arriving in Gentile country Jesus is encountered violently by a demon-possessed man. Tragically this man is beyond submission. No one can control him. He is seemingly an all powerful strong man (which recalls the parable of Binding The Strong Man in Mark 3:27), who is thus sentenced to total isolation and to life among the dead. He lives among the tombs of his people (for the Jews, graveyards were ritually impure places because of the presence of the dead; cf. Matthew 23:22). We think of tombs as holes in the ground, yet in that day they were more often caves in hills, in which one could easily stand, enter, and if need by “live”. Yet as we learn about this man’s isolation, lack of a human name, family, community, profession and connections – we see how broken, imprisoned and dead he is.

In their encounter, the demoniac begs Jesus for mercy. The unclean spirits are able to recognize a “clean spirit” or righteous one, instantly. Unlike the living man who lives among the dead, Jesus is alive and brings life with him wherever he goes. In their exchange this seemingly strong man recognizes the stronger one who has come into this foreign land. This Son of the Most High God is the only one who can bind the malevolent power and destructiveness of this demon, or as we learn this mass of demons. For when Jesus names the unclean spirit, (a typical action in exorcism stories) we learn that the occupying spirits are not one, but rather “Legion” which is the Roman military term for an army force which at full staffing would include 5,000 men.

Legions were used by the Romans to occupy the Mediterranean world, in particular Palestine and Israel. So in a sense Jesus is taking on the occupying power, doing his own “occupy movement” in the region of the Decapolis (a league of 10 cities joined together for military protection and trading purposes, a bit like NAFTA and NATO today. Legion seems to recognize the power of Jesus and so they ask to be sent from the man, but not from the land. They beg to be sent into a nearby flock of 2,000 pigs. While we might see pigs as cute, they were anything but to the ancient Jews. The Torah teachings of the First Testament declared them unclean for keeping and eating (Leviticus 11:7-8, Deuteronomy 14:8). Jesus is victorious, overcoming the demons, destroying their power and not only freeing the man, but liberating him to return to the wholeness that God intended for him : seated, clothed, sane – in his right mind – recognizing himself, and being seen by others, as a child of God.

But the destruction of their herd of swine impresses and depresses the nearby townsfolk. They see in that action the eschatological power of Jesus, but do they also see another foreign occupying power who has come and destroyed their livelihood? While Jesus has succeeded, the townsfolk do not want him to stick around. The demons have seemingly counter-attacked in the midst of their defeat. We might expect the story to end in the good news victory of verse 15, but instead it continues to 20 and Jesus is exiled.

But fear doesn’t have the last word. Jesus doesn’t accept the liberated man into his group of 12 disciples destined to work in Israel, rather he calls and charges him to use his freedom to declare the good news (gospel) of what Jesus has done for him in his land, with his people and in his language. What’s harder to do magical, miraculous healings, or to call and charge disciples? In its conclusion, this story takes another twist. Where we thought we saw failure we see an unimaginable success.

In today’s lectionary texts in Isaiah 61 and John 1 we see how God continues reverses the ways of the world, and they ways in which we expect God to act, whether that be in ancient exiled Israel of Isaiah’s day (700 BC) or in John the Baptizers day. President Roosevelt said “we have nothing to fear but fear itself.” Yet we often are still troubled, traumatized and immobilized by fear – of ourselves, of others, of the unknown and the evil.

How do you hear God inviting you to freedom from fear in these texts?

How do you need God to deliver you from the fears that occupy and possess you; us?

How is the Christmas Story of the birth of Christ good news for our world and city today?

Next week: Mark 5:21-43. Look for a study of the text on Monte’s blog at www.monteskewed.blogspot.com during the week to prepare for Sunday.

2011-12-02T21:00:00.002+01:00

Bumper Sticker of the Week

2011-12-02T20:36:00.001+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, December 4^th

Mark 4:35-41 | Isaiah 40:1-11 | Mark 1:1-8

Today’s passage of Mark follows the Jesus’ teaching about how God works in the world with several parables. Beginning with the Sower and the Seed (Mark 4:1-20) the parables portray the mysterious aspect of the dominion of God which starts slow, unexpectedly in ways that we overlook as human beings, yet it grows – despite us – and emerges to completely transform the universe. Mark tells us that Jesus repeatedly told stories in parable form, untying the confusing knots that people seemed to have tied themselves up into as they sought to understand God.

the sky is falling and our boat is sinking

Mark 4:34 ends with the portrayal of Jesus explaining everything to the disciples, and yet once their boat starts to sink they don’t seem to know anything. Jesus suggests that they cross the Sea of Galilee (from the Israelite Western side near Capernaum) to the other side (the Easter Pagan/Gentile side). They embark from what the familiar land that they know towards an unknown one to discover. While on this journey a storm comes up, as scholars tells us that they often do on the Sea of Galilee. But what are they so afraid? Aren’t they fisherman? We often forget that the Israelites weren’t big water people. They were farmers and shepherds, people of the land. Throughout the First Testament we see that their enemies are costal sea-going people or masters of maritime commerce: the Egyptians and the Philistines. Genesis 1 tells of creation from the primordial waters of chaos that existed before God began to create. Leviathan – the monstrous representation of the evil that wrestles with and against God and God’s creative initiative – inhabits the ocean and seas – the arena where God strove against the dark chaos that threatens creation and humanity. [Isaiah 51:9-10; Job 26:11-12, Psalm 18:15].

The story is simple and reminds us as readers of the story of Jonah, which is similarly constructed: 1) a departure by boat, 2) a violent storm at sea, 3) a sleeping main character [Jesus and Jonah], 4) badly frightened sailors, 5) a miraculous stilling related to the main character, and 6) a marveling response by the sailors. But unlike the troublesome prophet Jonah, Jesus is not fleeing from God, rather Jesus is accomplishing God’s will, heading towards the Gentiles. Moreover the disciples don’t ask Jesus to intercede and beg God to save them. Rather they call upon Jesus to save them.

Jesus is portrayed as God. Sleeping on a cushion, most likely some sort of apparatus needed in the boat he reminds us of the common Near Eastern vision of God as sleeping, needing to be roused by our prayers to intervene [Psalm 44:23-24, 35:23 & 59:4] and the rebuker of the destructive powers of the sea [Isaiah 51:9-10; Job 26:11-12, Psalm 18:15] and also the helper of Israel [Psalm 46 & Zech 2:10-3:2]. The panic of the disciples leads to an exchange of questions and answers between them [v. 38, 41] and Jesus [v. 39 & 40]. Does Jesus rebuke and calm the seas, or the disciples? How could they be so surprised by this divine power emanating forth from Jesus after they’ve already seen so much of him [Mark 1:1 until now]? Haven’t they had their eyes and ears open? Were they not paying attention when Jesus was explaining everything to them? How can they not know him?

2^nd week of advent texts – looking for good news from god [ Isa 40 & Mk 1]

The other passages for today, the second week of advent, recall the majestic prophetic poetry of Isaiah in which God declares that he will save and deliver his people from their catastrophic exile and captivity in Babylon in the 7^th century BCE. Where all seems lost, dark and twisted, God will raise up a path, straight, clear, navigeable in order to bring his people home to the kingdom he intends for them. They understood that to be the return to Israel. We, in the light of Christ, read that prophecy as also pointing to Jesus, and to the ministry of John the Baptizer who prepared the people for the message of Jesus . It’s in Mark 1:1-8 that we witness that. Jesus has come to declare good news. More than just the radical affirmation that God loves us. It’s a gospel proclamation that God’s justice has won, that the providence, purpose and passionate grace of God is bigger than the destructive and dehumanizing powers of evil in our cosmos. Eugene Peterson translates the description of baptism in Mark 1:8 as “a holy baptism by the Holy Spirit – it will change you from the inside out.”

Nowadays it seems like we hear regularly hear good news and bad news lumped together. Interest rates are low, but people are losing their homes. Jobs are being created, but unemployment is growing faster. The Fed is bailing out the European Union, but the Euro could be dead in the water by next month. We look to our government and representatives for guidance and pragmatic solutions, and get scapegoating and complicated policies. Our texts for today remind us that God in Jesus is different than what we expect, coming not as we imagine, but accomplishing more than we could ever ask. How can you welcome the surprising simplicity of God into your life today? How might God be inviting us as a church community to join in with the unepexteced ways in which God is working for good news in our city, church life and our neighborhoods? How do you need God to deliver you from what might feel to you like a sinking boat today?

Next week: Mark 5:1-20. Look for a study of the text on Monte’s blog at www.monteskewed.blogspot.com during the week to prepare for Sunday.

2011-11-23T17:34:00.000+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, November 27^th

Mark 4:21-34 | Isaiah 64:1-9 | Mark 13:24-37

Today’s passage of Mark continues the teaching of Jesus in parables. Undoubtedly, since Mark is a good writer, it is directly connected to the parable of the Sower and the Seed (Mark 4:1-20). In that parable we learn of God’s abundant and amazing grace similar to seeds scattered on diverse and different types of soil. God gives the gift of faith and then grows it as we respond. We’re not just passive observers, but also actively involved.

lamps | measures | seeds oh my!

The first parable of the lamp and the bushel remind me of my childhood and the song we often sang in Sunday School, “hide it under a bushel? No! I’m gonna let it shine!” But that’s from Matthew 5. It’s not what Jesus is talking about here. What is Jesus talking about with the hidden and made manifest? A light is meant to illuminate the room. Why then do we need ears to hear? Isn’t it obvious? Not to me!

Throughout the First Testament light is associated with word. In Greek the two world ressemble each other logos (word) and lychos (light). Think of Psalm 119:10 “your word is a light unto my feet and a lamp unto my path.” It seems thus that the lamp, or light, would be a fitting way to continue the development of the falling of the seed of the word on the various kinds of soil. Jesus repeats twice an invitation to pay attention, to listen, to “get it”. (verses 23 and 24). But what is it that we are supposed to hear?

The second parable is about the measure, a comment that seems to talk a bit about karma. As you give to others, you’ll receive. Jesus is talking not about cooking measurements, but the measure used for determining how much you received when you purchased something, for example a pound (or their equivalent then) of flour. If you skimped on your customers, you’d have bad karma in the sense that you’d probably have few faithful customers since you were a cheat.

Mark is writing about something being hidden to be revealed, and Jesus seems to be often speaking and teaching in a way that’s not obvious for those that hear. Is he meaning to be secretive or sneaky? Or is he just a bad teacher? Joel Marcus (a New Testament scholar whom I’m using for my studies). Writes this:

God’s word uttered by Jesus, is misunderstood by his opponents – misunderstood in the existential sense of being rejected, not allowed to penetrate, or emptied of its force. This rejection of the word leads inexorably to Jesus’ death, a result that, from the divine perspective is necessary (8:31; 9:31; 10:33-34), he is killed by those who cannot grasp his identity and who look and look but never see, hear and hear but never understand. But in this divinely willed death, which is caused by the spiritual blindness and deafness of human beings, a new age of revelation begins; after Good Friday and Easter Sunday Jesus’ identity as Messiah and Son of God, which was hidden from all during his early lifetime, becomes the open proclamation of the Markan church community. The obscurity of the word thus ultimately serves the purpose of its revelation by leading to Jesus’ revelators death; what was hidden was hidden only in order that it might come into the light.

Today’s passage includes the telling of the parable in verses 1-9, followed by an explanation of the parable by Jesus to the Twelve in verse 10-20. Some scholars argue that verse 10-20 are Mark’s footnotes, his interpretation of the parable as he seeks to explain it to his audience of the first Century, early Christians facing religious persecution in the time of Roman Emperor Nero.

two more seeds parables (4:26-34)

The first parable lifts up the mystery of life. The seed is planted and then grows on its own. It knows what it’s intended to do, what it’s purpose is: to grow and give life. The sower/farmer plants it an then it does its work on its own. The focus seems to be on the interim stage of growth between the sowing and the harvesting. It’s like the kingdom of God which is mysteriously present and growing in the world even while we sleep or don’t see it.

The second parable is about the final stage of fruit-bearing or harvest. This motif of plants and seeds echoes some developed in the First Testament (Ezekiel 17:23 and 31:6, Daniel 4:18, 21).The mustard seed, supposedly the smallest of all seeds, becomes a giant tree (or bush). It’s less about size (which is important in our Western Culture of Consumerism and Macho-men) than it is about the transformation. The mustard seed is subversive, fooling you. It seems small and unimportant, and yet it’s paramount. Much like the kingdom of God, which seems negligent in terms of importance, or seemingly impotent in the face of life’s suffering and challenges. And yet…..

The chapter ends (verses 33-34) with a conclusion. Jesus keeps teaching this same thing, always in parables. Why? Why does he explain to some and not others? Didn’t Jesus come to tell and show everyone of God’s love? Why would he do so in a hard-to-understand way? How do we struggle today to articulate God’s love, what it means to follow Jesus, and how we are called to live as a community of radical Jesus followers in the 21^st century?

Next week: Mark 4:35-41.

2011-11-18T19:23:00.000+01:00

Bumper Sticker of the Week

2011-11-18T19:12:00.004+01:00

Questions for going deeper with the Scriptures for today, November 20^th

Mark 4:1-20

Today’s passage of Mark contains the first major teaching passage included in the gospel. Several times Mark has emphasized Jesus’ teaching prowess and the way in which his teaching has an authority that many have never yet witnessed (examples include Mark 1:21-22; 1:39, 2:1-3). Jesus tells a parable in response to the concluding verse (35) of chapter 3. “Whoever does God’s will is my brother and sister and mother.” So how do we know what’s God will is?

structure of the text – what’s in a parable?

The first teaching narrative is a parable. It’s a Greek word that has taken on a new meaning because of the gospel and is used in most modern languages. So what is a parable?

· Is it a detailed analogy, a way of saying something poetically?

· Is it an allegory used to explain complicated things,

in which each image represents something in particular?

· Is it a traditional proverb that serves to reinforce

the status quo or cultural conventions?

· Is it a comparison or comparative illustration,

a rhetorical story told to persuade someone about something?

· Or is it something else?

A parable is more than just a rhetorical device or a pretty way of saying something deep. It’s intended to be unsettling, disturbing, ominous, shocking, transformational. It’s a radical word birthed in a simple story that’s about the new and disturbing thing that God is doing in our midst. But God is doing that new thing through a reversal of our expectations, values, social standings and roles in society. It’s not always obvious what they’re about. Parables are meant to be wrestled with. They tease us into active thought. As we wrestling with them, hoping to “get” the parable, we ourselves are changed. Parables don’t just tell us about God, somehow they become a process through which the Dominion of God is midwifed in our lives as individual and a community. It’s through parables that we can experience the Kingdom of God.

Is it about the soil, the seeds or the farmer?

On one hand Mark seems to be structured around two principal parables: this one (Mark 4:1-20) and also the Parable of the Heir of the Vineyard (Mark 12:1-12). Do they summarize the mission of Jesus? As a teacher, and as the rejected heir to the kingdom?

What is today’s parable about? If it’s not just an analogy or a narrative illustration of something, what is it?

What are the types of soils? What does that mean for us today? When Mark wrote down the gospel (probably in the 50-60s of the common era) he’s

addressing version of the good news of Jesus to his church, one that is being heavily persecuted throughout the Roman Empire under Emperor Nero. What might this parable say to people who are persecuted and suffer for daring to believe in Jesus? What might the path, or rocky soil, or thorns mean to and for them?

Historians tell us that in Jesus’ day a 10-fold harvest would be considered to be a very good one. A 30, 60, or 100 fold harvest would be nothing short of miraculous. Is that possible for us? Or is Jesus talking about an eschatological event, a definitive revealing of God’s power in the world?

Why does the sower so the way that he does? He’s crazy, throwing seeds not just into good soil, but everywhere? That’s not sustainable agriculture. Who is the sower? Where do we fit in? Are we the seeds? The soils? Sowers or farmers still to come?

On a first read the parable is simple, yet then it’s complicated. Even Mark felt the need to explain it. Jesus is revealing secrets about the eschatological reign of God. To understand those mysteries requires close attention and an open heart. Verse 12 points back to Isaiah 6:9-10 & Ezekiel 12:1-2 in which God directs the prophets to talk to a hard-hearted people. But here the people Jesus is talking to want to be faithful, they’re listening to him in the midst of the struggle, oppression and persecution that they face as the hoi polloi (or 99%), and as Christians. There seems to be tension around listening to God and hearing God’s will. Baggage can get in the way. The disciples are recipients of special knowledge but they lack the spiritual insight and understanding. So what is Jesus saying to them then? What is Jesus saying to us today?

Next week: Mark 4:21-34. Look for a study of the text

on Monte’s blog at www.monteskewed.blogspot.com

during the week to prepare for Sunday.

2011-11-08T22:37:00.003+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, November 13

Mark 3:20-35

Today’s passage of Mark begins following the description of the 12^th of the 12 disciples as the one who will betray Jesus (3.19) and then continues describing those who oppose Jesus who range from the Jerusalem scribes – or religious experts – to include even his own nuclear family. What role does family play in our lives? How do we understand family today?

Structure of the text

Some scholars (including the one I’m using Joel Marcus) break down this section of Mark into a chiastic structure (like a sandwich where the “meat” or main part of the story is in the center. Here’s how they see it:

3:20-21 Jesus’ relatives

3:23-26 Charge of demonic agency/power

3:27 Parable of the Strong Man

3:28-30 Charge of demonic agency/power

3:31-35 Jesus’ relatives

It’s all in the Family: guilt & freedom

Jesus returns from creating a small tight-knit inner circle of those who follow him (the 12) and finds himself again swamped by crowds, so much so that they can’t even eat. It’s in this swirl of people, needs and questions that his family comes to him. They think he’s crazy, “out of it” or standing outside of what is normal. Rather than be excited for his popularity, they seem irritated, embarrassed, ashamed of the things that he’s saying. It’s as if they come to seize and bind him in with a straight jacket and lock him up out of sight for his own good – and for theirs too.

In this midst of this rejection, there is more rejection from the spiritual authorities [scribes] come from the religious and cultural capital of Jerusalem. Unlike the crowds, they’re neither happy with nor impressed by Jesus. He’s playing it too loose, interpreting and teaching the Torah with too much independence. He’s not been officially recognized with such authority by the religious establishment. What’s gotten into him? Who does he think he is? It’s often in the ancient world that people thought to be crazy or insane were seen as demon possessed. Their possession explained why their weren’t in agreement with their family or compliance with their culture and tradition. Jesus is doing a new thing, so he must be possessed. Since he’s not with them, he must be against them.

Beelzebub was understood as the first among the demons, their leader. Different than Satan, he was a Canaanite deity whose name means “exalted Baal” or “Lord of the Flies” (2 Kings 1:2).

Jesus challenges them with a rhetorical question (v. 23) and then three parables (24-26)

Why would Satan defeat himself? If Jesus was demon possessed why would he be exorcising demons? In Mark 1:24 we even hear the demons say that Jesus has nothing in common with them. That would be self-defeating, and just plain stupid. The heart of the story is about the Strong Man, which most likely refers back to God who liberates his captive people (Isaiah 49:24-25 & Psalm 68:19). Does Jesus see himself as the realization of this promise?; as the effective opponent of Satan, the Stronger One who exorcisms testify to his role as the spearhead of the inbreaking of God’s dominion or kingdom into this world which seems to be dominated by Satan? Jesus is the strong liberator. He moves from being on the defensive to going on the offensive. It’s not Jesus who has committed an unforgivable sin by making a pact with the devil as his enemies have charged. Rather they – his enemies – have committed an unforgivable sin by their false accusation. The unforgiveable sin is twisting the evidence of Jesus’ life-giving power into blasphemy that he is demonically possessed, intent on destroying and corrupting what God has created. The parable of the Strong Man isn’t just a strong but has become reality. The seemingly powerful enemies are rendered incapable of inflicting real harm.

The passage ends with a return to the relatives and family of Jesus. He challenges the status quo and traditional way of understanding family, specifically in a culture and religion based upon the notion of family (think of the tribes, the Israelites as “God chosen people”). There is a wordplay on outside and inside. In 21 the family asserts that Jesus is crazy: outside of himself. Here they are outside the house looking for Jesus (v. 32). Jesus redefines family, social connection, - community. It’s not about genes or heritage but about our ears, hearing God’s will and doing it. It’s not a right or a hereditary privilege, but a responsiveness, an action, active solidarity. Jesus redefines family as those that do God’s will, who risk being hated by all (even family) on account of his name (Mark 13:12-13)

· What strikes you in these stories? How does it interact with your life today?

· What does it mean to be a child of God?; to be part of God’s family?

· How do you struggle with sin?; Is your sin unforgiveable? Why? Why not?

· How is God calling you – us as a church – to be community?; to be a family? What does that mean for how we relate?; Is that a helpful or harmful image for church?

Next week: Mark 4:1-20 Look for a study of the text on Monte’s blog at www.monteskewed.blogspot.com during the week to prepare for Sunday.

2011-11-04T06:15:00.003+01:00

Occupy Oakland

There's been much brouhaha about Occupy Oakland for the past days, in particular since the police intervention last week and the general strike yesterday. I am quite progressive and believe that the Occupy movement can bring about good for our society. So either I'm objective or subjective, as we each can only start our thought process from our own individual point of view. Today I've heard on the radio and read in media and notes that Oakland has sunk into violence and that the occupy movement is a shame and a sham.

I spent most of the afternoon yesterday in downtown Oakland at the occupy general strike headquarters with my 9 and 7 year old children. We heard music and speakers. We saw signs, posters, educational murals and a candle ridden station for peace. We inhaled marijuana that was smoked by some. We heard prayers offered at the inter-religious tent. We saw babies in strollers and carriers on the parents' backs. We saw grandparents with their grandchildren. We saw school groups in matching t-shirts. We saw teachers, urban professionals, homeless, students, diverse clergy and random working class folks all milling around together peacefully. It seemed much more like a music festival or neighborhood festival than a riot or chaotic gathering of looters. Never was I afraid - for myself or my children.

We spent a large portion of our time in line to get a copy of the silk-screened poster pictured above. Of all the things going on it was what most interested my children - to see art happening and to see the implications and use of art. And so we waited for over 45 minutes to get a copy. They spent most of the time observing the artist up close, while I snaked my way through the tent city talking with others in the line alongside me. The woman in front of me was both a grandma and an Episcopal priest who serves faith communities in Richmond and Berkeley. The two women behind me were in their early 30s and live in Oakland while working in San Francisco. In our talking we talked of faith, public school, hardships for urban living families, good local food places, and how justice has to be founded upon some sort of spiritual truth. Throughout all our conversation they often asked about my kids, as we watched them from afar next to the poster artist.

While this was going on, unbeknownst to us, a few destructive vandals were vandalizing the Whole Foods Store about 15 blocks away. The violence and destructive that was repeatedly evoked on the news reports were done by a few people who covered their faces and heads. What wasn't reported was that the other members in the nonviolent protest crowd intervened to physically deter the few anarchist brigands. Oakland residents know what the Whole Foods store has done for downtown Oakland and most often enjoy the sun-soaked café tables outside of the store destroyed by a few out-of-towners who came to Oakland to destroy things. I would advance that similar situations are what occurred when other looters smashed windows of a few bank locations.

(This is a clever cartoon making its way around Facebook this week.

I find it to be an accurate interpretation of yesterday and

a poignant comment about media abuse of news in the name of profit)

I found the whole day quite powerful. The only time I was a bit anxious was when my children stood next to someone taking a bong hit. Of course they undoubtedly are exposed to second hand marijuana throughout most places in California. I took my children so that they can see what it means to take a stand for something you believe in, to see with their own eyes that you can fight for what you think is just without using weapons, breaking windows, or hurting others in particular police officers. I didn't expect them to understand everything, but hopefully to experience something. I asked them this morning at breakfast what they thought about the day. Their response was "it was kind of boring." What they most enjoyed was the ride on the public transportation train downtown. If anything the day was a bit too quiet for them. But at least they got their poster (even if I don’t like “hella” as an adjective or adverb).

2011-11-04T00:08:00.003+01:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, November 6^th

Mark 3:7-19

Today’s passage of Mark tells of the increasing power of the ministry of Jesus and this of his choice to name a group of twelve disciples who will be his inner circle and constant companions.

the spreading impact of jesus among the people | Mark 3:7-12

The people are overwhelmed with gratitude for Jesus. His words, presence and healing actions seem to touch a need, to connect with a deep common longing for something unknown, promised and dreamed of. Mark describes the crowd as if they are going to crush Jesus, as they press upon him and exert pressure upon him to respond to their needs and desires. Interestingly enough the entire narrative is structured around the actions of Jesus. He is not passive, but active, setting the tone, changing the conversation, challenging the status quo (v. 7, 9 12 are his actions which frame the story).

Mark details the crowd and their origins: people from predominantly Gentile [non-Jewish] areas are beginning to be attracted to Jesus. The six place names represent an increasing sociological distance from Judaism which was traditionally centered in Judaea and Jerusalem, to areas conquered and converted by Jews to Tyre and Sidon which had never been part of Israel.

The reaction of human sufferers to Jesus in 3:7-10 is paralleled by a demonic reaction in 3:11-12. Mark thus seems to insist upon a connection between physical illness and exorcism of unclean spirits. Curiously here Jesus allows the demons to confess his divine identity as “the son of God” 3:11 as compared to Mark 1:34. Why does Jesus rebuke the demons, forbidding to make him known, to make known what the heavenly voice also declared at his baptism in 1:11? Scholars refer to this curious trait, specifically found in Mark, as the Messianic Secret. It would seem that Mark is lifting up a literary motif of messianic secrecy in view of articulating that Jesus’ divine Sonship is hidden from human knowledge until the crucifixion and resurrection can make clear the exact way in which it is to be understood.

“Hoi Polloi” is an idiom for the little people. It’s actually a transliteration of the Greek words for “the people”. In our current socio-political context an emerging idiom for the hoi polloi is the 99%.

· How is Jesus needed by them in the text? How do they try to control him? How does he respond? Why?

· How is Jesus needed by the 99% today? What message would Jesus have for our current socio-political context characterized by occupiers and tea partiers?

Jesus picks a team and organizes his movement | Mark 3:13-19

This pericope (or literary unit) closes the first major section of the Gospel of Mark [1:16-3:11] and opens the second section [3:13-6:6] with a commissioning narrative (cf 1:16-20). Jesus scales a mountain. The Israelites often considered high places or mountain tops to be places of experiences of the sacred. In response to his growing popularity and the massive need of the 99% of his day, Jesus chooses twelve followers and sets them apart for special tasks and fellowship. They will become the trusted organizers of his movement and his closest friends and confidents.

The pericope is composed of two parts: 1) Jesus ascends the mountain and summons his disciples 3:13-15 and then 2) the list of the Twelve 3:16-19. Jesus ascent of the mountain reminds a good Bible reader of Moses’ ascents of Mount Sinai through the Pentateuch (Exodus 19, 24, 34; Number 27; Deuteronomy 9-10, 32). Twelve is the number of the tribes of Israel, an anciently significant number in the culture, language and religious identity of the Jews. In a sense the number 12 represents completion or fullness.

Jesus calls the disciples to him He summons them. He does the choosing. There seems to have been many more than twelve. But Jesus chooses these twelve. From here forward Mark portrays Jesus as one who is almost constantly surrounded by a circle of disciples; he does not exist primarily as a solitary individual but as a being-in-community. Living the Christian life means “being with him”. What then does it mean to follow him as a disciple?

It was common to give nicknames or special names to beloved followers. Choosing to follow a new master or teacher, signified a radical transformation not just of education but of personal identity. Our relationships define our being. With the group of Twelve there seems to be a smaller prominent group of three: Simon (or Peter), James and John. Why? Was Jesus playing favorites? Curiously the First Testament often talks of three patriarchs, naming the God of the Bible as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Is there a connection here? Obviously the list is written after the fact, as Mark adds foreshadowing to the list describing among things the choice that Judas will make in the end after having been chosen by Jesus.

· What strikes you in these stories? How does it interact with your life today?

· What does it mean to be a Jesus follower? Is that different than being a Christian?

· How do you explain following Jesus to other people? How would you to a stranger if they asked you to do so?

· How is God calling you – us as a church – to follow him? To be church today?

2011-10-28T20:03:00.000+02:00

Bumper Sticker of the Week

2011-10-27T23:00:00.000+02:00

Blogging Towards , Sunday, October 30^th

Mark 2:23-3:6

How do you decide what is right? How can we agree on what is morally and ethically good? Isn't it just a question of subjective point of view and our own particular context at any given moment? Today’s passage of Mark contains the last 2 conflicts in a series of encounters between Jesus and the Pharisees begun back in 2:13. Both stories have obvious parallels and contrasts: they deal with the Sabbath and one concerns the actions of Jesus and one his disciples. Both stories invite deeper reflection upon the meaning, purpose and scope of the Sabbath as a spiritual practice and religious law in light of Jesus’ comment in 2:22 “No! One pours new wine into new wineskins.”

Jesus appeals to god’s original intention in creation | Mark 2:23-28

This encounter is all about the Sabbath, the day of intentional rest that the God of Israel commanded. It’s not about justifying laziness, but rather an invitation to worship. Observing the Sabbath isn’t first and foremost about obeying a rule, but more about remembering the past and appropriating it for today. The Sabbath is one of the 10 commandments that the Jews are asked to practice. Ironically this is the only commandment that changes in between the two times the commandments are recorded in the Bible (Exodus 31:12-17 and Deuteronomy 5:12-15). Sabbath rest is a spiritual practice of taking a break from the ordinary to remember and perceive the extraordinary, to discern God’s presence and purpose in our daily life and concrete world. The Israelites are asked to practice Sabbath in remembrance of God’s creative work of 6 days followed by a day of rest, and also because before the Exodus liberation they were slaves in Egypt, unable to rest. The First Testament contains several how to guides for doing Sabbath: Exodus 31:12-17: 34:21& 35:1-3, and Deuteronomy 5:12-15. The rest is required even in crucial times like harvest time and the construction of the Tabernacle. God is saying that we need and deserve a holy break, to take time to do other holy work – spending time with God in remembering and listening. Grace has to be cultivated. Jesus and his disciples get in trouble not for stealing wheat (Lev 19:9; 23:22 describes God’s social security program for the poor and hungry), but rather because they’re picking of wheat is perceived by the Pharisees as the work of harvesting. We see the Jesus event and wonder why didn’t the get on board once that saw that Jesus was doing a new thing? Why were they threatened? Did Jesus represent a threat to their power?; to their way of being?; a worldview deemed as heretical?; was he working against them or with them? We don’t know exactly, in particular as Mark is not an “objective” narrator. But he does structure his telling of the emergence of the opposition to the Jesus movement in a literary way that points to a deeper meaning. This second major section of the gospel forms a chiasm (a literary sandwich structure, common in Jewish literature, that consists in sandwiching the principal point in the middle of corresponding stories.) While we don’t have to understand it to “get” the story, it does point to the beauty and complexity with which Mark

Jesus threatens the status quo by doing good | Mark 3:1-6

This second story about the spiritual practice of Sabbath happens again on a Sabbath day in a synagogue. In this place of gathered spiritual community, Jesus confronts an established world view. The atmosphere is loaded. Unkown folks are trying to trip up Jesus, to get him to do what they see as the wrong thing. The man is described with a shriveled hand v.3. It’s not dried up like a raisin, but rather dried up in the sense of paralysis, not able to do what God intended. But Jesus isn’t just a happy go lucky healer, he’s also an agent provacateur. He’s trying to heal more than just that hand.

Jesus challenges the crowd with a real need, not a hypothetical dilemma. Is healing work? Is it wrong to heal this man on the day of rest? Deliberate transgression of the Sabbath law carried the death penalty (Exodus 31:14-15; Numbers 15:32-36). In the oral rabbinical tradition it was understood that the Sabbath laws may and indeed must be broken to rescue life that is in danger. This principle grew out of experiences during the experiences during the Maccabean Revolt, when pious Jews who refused to defend themselves on the Sabbath where slaughtered by the Syrians (1 Maccabbees 2:29-41). But was this man in a situation where his life was in danger? Couldn’t Jesus have just waited until the next day, after the Sabbath, to heal him?

Jesus is angry at the lack of compassion in the hard-hearted hearts of the Pharisees, who are deliberately compared to the hard heartedness of Pharoah in regards to the Israelites in Egypt (Exodus 7:3, 13, 22; 8:15, etc.) Yet he’s smart. He doesn’t “touch” the man, rather the man stands and sticks his arm out and then bam! He’s healed. Ironically, Jesus reacts to the Pharisees’ lack of compassion. And at the end of the encounter, the Pharisees are reacting, seeking the death of Jesus, because of his compassion. Like the demons in Mark 1:24. The Pharisees are threatened by Jesus, who threatens the status quo with his words and actions. Has Jesus come to destroy everything that they already know? Why won’t he just get with the traditional program already? The Pharisees think that they’re doing right. Jesus thinks he is. How does one decide?

· What strikes you in these stories? How does it interact with your life today?

· How do you decide what is good and necessary in terms of your actions?

· What is Jesus fighting for in these two encounters? Is it still relevant for our world today? Why? How?

· Jesus seems to be leading an occupy the Sabbath movement. What do you think?

· How does Jesus challenge the status quo in this story? How does he do so today?

· How is God calling you – us as a church – to follow him? To be church today?

Next week: Mark 3:7-19

2011-10-19T15:13:00.002+02:00

Blogging Towards Sunday, October 23^rd

Mark 2:18-22

¹⁸ Now John’s disciples and the Pharisees were fasting; and people came and said to him, ‘Why do John’s disciples and the disciples of the Pharisees take on the discipline of fasting, but yours do not?’ ¹⁹Jesus said to them, ‘When you're celebrating a wedding, you don't skimp on the cake and wine. You feast. Later you may need to pull in your belt, but not now. As long as the bride and groom are with you, you have a good time. No one throws cold water on a friendly bonfire.

²⁰The days will come when the bridegroom is taken away from them, and then they will fast on that day.

²¹ ‘No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old cloak; otherwise, the patch pulls away [rips: in Greek schism] from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear is made.

²²And no one puts new wine into old wineskins; otherwise, the wine will burst the skins, and the wine is lost, and so are the skins; but one puts new wine into fresh wineskins.’

Comments and Questions

Today’s selection from Mark is the third, or the center, of a 5 series structures of stories that NT scholar Joel Marcus calls “The Opposition Asserts Itself” for it presents the reaction of the religious establishment to the new word and religious event experienced in this Jesus of Nazareth. After a chapter detailing Jesus’ explosion onto the speaking circuit of ancient Palestine, and his rapidly emerging fame, he’s challenged by the establishment, the Pharisees, Scribes, Sadducees, those that are at the top of the religious pyramid in his society. the second and third confrontation of Jesus with the Pharisees.

What were they afraid of? We see the Jesus event and wonder why didn’t they get on board once that saw that Jesus was doing a new thing? Why were they threatened? Did Jesus represent a threat to their power?; to their way of being?; a worldview deemed as heretical?; was he working against them or with them? We don’t know exactly, in particular as Mark is not an “objective” narrator. But he does structure his telling of the emergence of the opposition to the Jesus movement in a literary way that points to a deeper meaning. This second major section of the gospel forms a chiasm (a literary sandwich structure, common in Jewish literature, that consists in sandwiching the principal point in the middle of corresponding stories.) While we don’t have to understand it to “get” the story, it does point to the beauty and complexity with which Mark records his version of the Jesus Experience. Here’s what it looks like:

A Mark 2:1-12 Jesus heals a paralytic and forgives sin

B Mark 2:13-17 Jesus eats with sinners, a doctor comes for the sick not the healthy

C Mark 2:18-22 Why is he different? One pours new wine into new wineskins!

B’ Mark 2:23-28 Plucking grain on the Sabbath: What’s the point of the Sabbath?

A’ Mark 3:1-6 Healing on the Sabbath. What is permissible on the Sabbath?

Fasting was a common spiritual practice. It was required on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). But we also know that the Pharisees and Essenes at Qumran (who wrote the Dead Sea Scrolls) fasted twice a week (Luke 18:12, Didache 8:1). It’s likely that this practice of fasting was connected with eschatological hopes, and even a desire to hasten the Day of the Lord, the End (Amos 8:11, 19-24, Jer 16:14, 19:6) or the Apocalypse. We tend to see it as the destruction of the world, yet they more likely saw it as God’s definitive coming with justice into the world, righting the wrongs, overthrowing the unjust and powerful and raising up the poor and oppressed. Eschatology refers to the study of the last things, the moment\change/transformation of the world from how it is to how God intends it to be. This conflict is about more than personal piety. It’s about universal salvation.

Jesus responds to their questions and concerns about piety and spiritual practice with a prophetic word (v.20) and then two short parables: about the cloth (v 21) and the new wine (22). Both the image of the bridegroom/wedding and the garment are associated with an eschatological change. In several religious traditions the cosmos is compared to a garment (see Heb 1:10-12 and Psalm 106:26-28). It infers that the Christ, or Messiah, rolls up this world garment and unfurls the new cosmos. The text uses the word “schism” v.21.

Jesus is challenging those that oppose him. Is he talking of religious schism and division? God is doing something different, a new thing (as Isaiah talks of). You can merely fit it into the way you do things and see the world; to “get” this new thing of God you have to change everything, your worldview, expectations, practices and vision. The old skins won’t stretch to accommodate the new wine. You have to put new wine into new wineskins!

· What strikes you in these stories? How does it interact with your life today?

· How would we respond to someone saying this to us in the church today?

· The world is changing all around us. According to Jesus’ teaching how are we called to change?; to be open to change?

· How do you – do we as a church – need to be freed from our habits, expectations, traditions – our used cloth and worn wineskins – to receive the gifts and call the Spirit of God has for us today?

· How is God calling you – us as a church – to follow him? To be church today?

Next week: Mark 2:23-3:6. Look for a study of the text on Monte’s blog at www.monteskewed.blogspot.com during the week to prepare for Sunday.