Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 16:19-20

The alternative, longer, ending to Mark mentions the Ascension of Jesus and then states that the disciples went out and proclaimed the good news. Their words were accompanied by confirmatory signs sent by God. I wonder in what ways we go out and proclaim the good news. I wonder what we have to say about God. I wonder to what, if anything, we point as indicative of God at work.

The critical point is that the story goes on. I wonder how we see it continuing in our day. I wonder what we do to tell it. This is the sheer wonder of gospel, that God participates with us. Whoever wrote this was not trying to eliminate the questions that we might see as being left at the end of verse 8, but is expressing confidence in the continuing presence of Jesus and of the story moving forward as his followers do his work and tell his good news, As Bonnie Bowman Thurston (Preaching Mark) says – “The reality of the risen Jesus and his continued involvement with his disciples provides both continuity with the resurrection account in v. 1-8 and a word of hope for today’s disciples, The Gospel continues to spread and the Lord continues to work with us (v. 20), and that is very good news indeed.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 16:14-18

The story is brought towards its next stage as the alternative, longer, ending continues. Jesus now appears to the whole disciple group, perhaps significantly as they are “at table”. It is certainly true that sharing meals is an important element in Jesus’ earthly life and ministry. Possibly the surprising thing is that there continues to be a substantial degree of doubt to the extent that Jesus challenges them on the matter. I wonder if our faith is as strong as it ought to be.

However, despite their lack of belief, they are commissioned to go and be the church, spreading the good news and doing little bits of kingdom work. They will be able to do all sorts of incredible things and that will demonstrate that God is with them. As Nelson Rivera (in Feasting on the Gospels – Mark) points out – “Unbelief is responded to here with a list of signs and wonders that would follow the disciples as they engage the proclamation in continuity with the mission of Jesus.” They may not really need to do some of what is mentioned here. I am not sure why they would pick up snakes or drink poison just to prove they could. I rather think that Mark, or, more probably, whoever wrote this additional ending to Mark’s Gospel, is adopting the technique sometimes used by Jesus of over-stating things in order to make a point with greater force, and ensure that the comment, and the concept, gets noted. Essentially, as Rivera adds, it is that – “a ministry of healing will be part of their mission.” I wonder how we bring healing to those whom we encounter. I wonder what we are doing, and what more we might do, to proclaim the good news of the risen Christ.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 16:9-13

 

The risen Jesus appears first to Mary Magdalene. This encounter is reported at much greater length in John’s gospel – 20:11-18. Mary is one of those who has greatly benefited from Jesus’ ministry. No wonder she wants to pay her last respects and is there at the tomb. Her loyalty is repaid by her meeting Jesus in these amazing circumstances. She goes to share the news, but the rest of them will not believe her. I wonder if there are times when we are unwilling to believe reports of the great things that God has done. 

This is followed by a reference to two disciples wearily walking home, presumably a brief reporting of Luke’s much longer account of the two disciples who met Jesus while they were walking to Emmaus – Luke 24:13-35.

The important thing here, despite the elements of disbelief, is the sharing of news. Mary and the two travellers had experiences that they were surely desperate to share. How frustrating that they were not believed. Perhaps the message of these added stories is something about the importance of building the community of faith. As Mary Luti (in Feasting on the Gospels – Mark) points out – “believing is not a private accomplishment, but a shared project of trust and mutual traditioning in the fellowship of believers of all times and places who, by the power of the Spirit, edify one another in strength and supply one another in lack.” I wonder how we contribute to the community of faith. I wonder about the impact of our encounters with the risen Christ.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 16:8b

Mark 16:8b

Mark has two possible endings. Almost certainly, what is now commonly called the shorter ending, and which I have here termed verse 8b, is the original. It leaves things up in the air, and maybe rightly so. However, it would seem that the relatively early church felt that a bit more needed to be said, and so verses 9 to 20 were assembled and added, giving a little more detail to the Easter event.

However, perhaps it should have been enough to leave things with the message just beginning to get out.

The women were told to tell the disciples, with Peter given a special mention, what they had experienced. They do so and, through this embryonic Christian community, Jesus sends out the wonderful message of salvation. I wonder whether Jesus is able to work through us as readily as ought to be the case. I wonder how we would have responded on the first Easter Day.

So, as Leith Fisher (Will you follow me?) points out – “the gospel ends with this final clash between the announcement of the Jesus who goes before into Galilee, which fills us with hope, and the portrayal of the women’s consternation and fear. To the end there is an unresolved ambiguity. …. Mark typically leaves us with a question, a question which will send us back to the gospel to read more carefully between the lines. More significantly, he leaves us with a question requiring an answer in our lives now.”

It is certainly an unfinished story. 

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 16:1-8

Once again the women are centre stage, and deservedly so. They have bothered to go to the tomb, taking spices so that they might anoint the body. They have ignored the fact that they might be seen and so linked to this trouble-maker. They have ignored that they might fall because of a massive stone across the tomb’s entrance. Three are named, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James, and Salome. The Sabbath is now over and so they are free to go about this business.

In a sense there is nothing that they can do, but they are desperate to complete these last offices of love. Thus, it is very early on Sunday morning that they set out. The conversation as they walk down the road is about the stone. They realised that their journey might be futile, but still they went, not knowing how they would deal with the stone issue. I wonder if we are ever willing to disregard seemingly impossible barriers because there is something we simply must do.

On arrival they were astounded to discover that the stone had already been moved. This was not what they had expected, and they certainly did not work out its implications. However, rather than a body to anoint, they discover a young man dressed in white who has amazing news. They do not need to be frightened, but they are not going to find Jesus there. Jesus is risen! They are instructed to go and tell the disciples, especially Peter, that they will meet Jesus back in Galilee. It is not surprising that the women left the tomb with a mixture of terror and amazement. This was too much to understand. What was going on? They kept it to themselves because they were scared.

We are inevitably looking round the corner and recognising the immensity of the moment. As José Cárdenas Pallares (A Poor Man Called Jesus: Reflections on the Gospel of Mark) comments – “To posit the factual reality of Jesus’ Resurrection is not to take refuge in daydreams. It is simply to wonder about a force that will generate an irreversible and unlimited liberation process.”

I wonder whether we would have got it. I wonder whether the Easter message excites us as much as it should.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 15:42-47

Everything ought to be right and in good order for the Sabbath. There were all sorts of rules and regulations, customs and traditions. Joseph of Arimathea appears on the scene wanting to make that possible. He asks Pilate if he might remove Jesus’ body in order to take it for burial.

Joseph is described as a respected member of the council and as waiting expectantly for the kingdom of God. Was he a secret disciple or admirer of Jesus? Possibly, but there is no evidence for that. John Donahue and Daniel Harrington (The Gospel of Mark) do not see that connection. They rather suggest – “from Mark we get the picture of Joseph as a man who takes the risk of seeing to the burial of someone who had been crucified as the “King of the Jews.” What inspires Joseph is his devotion not so much to Jesus whom he barely seems to know but to the commandment to bury a fellow Jew on the day of his death.”

Joseph then, it would seem, simply wants to do the right thing for an unfortunate person, no matter what he is supposed to have done, Pilate checks that Jesus is definitely dead. Crucifixion was normally a slow and lingering death and it may well be, on the time that has passed, that Jesus has not yet breathed his last. However, the centurion, experienced in such matters, assures Pilate that Jesus is dead, and so the body is released to Joseph. Joseph takes the body, lays it in a tomb, hewn out of the rock, and covers the entrance with a large rock. I wonder if there are times when, like Joseph, we need to be bold and ask for things that enable us to do what God wants us to do. Do we dare to speak up in difficult situations?

None of the disciples are to be seen. At least, if they are, it is not reported, and we can reasonably expect that it would have been. However, at least a couple of the women remain within a reasonable range. The two that are mentioned are Mary Magdalene and another Mary. They don’t do anything – except for the hugely important matter of noting where it is that Jesus is buried. They want to be able to come back to this spot.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 15:33-41

The trauma is complete. The end has been reached. Symbolically, the land is covered in darkness. Jesus cries out using words from the psalmist – my God, my God, why have you forsaken me? The scene is one of abandonment, isolation and despair. This is a horrific picture of anguish. Bonnie Bowman Thurston (Preaching Mark) describes the agony – “I view Jesus’ scream here as one of real suffering. He experiences not only horrific physical (crucifixion) and emotional (abandonment and mocking) suffering, but the most terrible thing any deeply religious person can face: the sense that God has abandoned him, that he is completely alone in a hostile universe. In this moment, Jesus enters into the darkest experience that humanity can face.”

The little details, and the four gospels give us slightly different windows into these, demonstrate how awful was this experience. Those who are near enough to hear, or so they think, what he might be saying suggest that he is calling for Elijah. We can imagine the words being somewhat incoherent. Some liquid, a sponge soaked in sour wine, is brought. The people, or some of them, wonder if Elijah will respond, but what rather happens is the moment of death. Jesus utters a loud cry and breathes his last. As Thurston says – “what that cry meant only God knows.”

Then, there is more detail. The curtain of the temple is torn in two. There is an affirmation of faith, surprisingly coming from the centurion, a Roman soldier doing his job, who is overseeing this process. He recognise that this was someone very special. It is also mentioned that some of the women who had followed Jesus were there. Mark names three, Mary Magdalene, another Mary and Salome. Perhaps these women disciples stayed around because they were not as greatly at risk as the men would have been. Perhaps it is because they were more committed, and more determined not to see Jesus complexly abandoned. What a devastating moment!

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 15:21-32

Normal practice was for the condemned person to carry his own cross to the place of crucifixion, but Jesus was too weak, because of the beatings he has suffered, and so the soldiers grab hold of a passer-by and force him to do this carrying. It is interesting that not only is he named himself, but the names of his sons are mentioned. Mark’s inclusion of this detail suggests that this family was known to the community for whom Mark originally wrote.

Jesus is offered some wine mixed with myrrh, but declines it. He is then put on the cross and left to die. He is mocked and ridiculed, even by the two bandits who are crucified alongside him. Jesus is completely alone in what is happening. I wonder where we would have fitted in to that scene.

Megan McKenna  (On Your Mark: Reading Mark in the Shadow of the Cross) reminds us of the abandonment and asks how we react – “Mark’s Jesus is revealed in his isolation, pain, and suffering and finally in his death. Only those who believe, those who follow Jesus in picking up their crosses can see him for who he is, the crucified one revealed in love. With the crowd, we are left standing before the cross to ask ourselves what we are doing. Do we join in the mockery or do we listen to those in pain? Even if we cannot alleviate their pain, do we hear them and take their words to heart?”

There is a sense in which we cannot believe what is happening as the story unfolds, and so perhaps understand that the disciples were at a complete loss, and it is not surprising that they disappeared – only we are left somewhat puzzled because the other aspect of all this is the question about how anyone could spend three years with Jesus and not get it.

I wonder what are the things that we don’t get that we should. I wonder how the time we spend with Jesus changes us. I wonder how we feel in this dreadful moment when we see Jesus on the cross.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 15:16-20

It’s the onlooker mentality moved up a notch. If something unusual is going on, we want to see what it is, and will stop or slow down to take a look, regardless of whether that is inappropriate or even dangerous. Having a laugh at someone else’s expense, especially when and because they are in a vulnerable position, accelerates our adopting that mindset.

In a sense, the soldiers are only doing their job and, given the macabre nature of this part of it, we could even say that it is not unreasonable for them to try and lighten their mood. Why not have a laugh at the expense of this poor victim, and especially as he is anyway a condemned criminal?

I wonder if we ever join in with mocking somebody who has been placed in a vulnerable position, whether, or not, the person concerned has played any intentional part in getting to the place in which they find themselves.

The allegation is that Jesus has claimed to be king, and so a purple cape and an ironic crown, formed of thorns, do the trick in terms of creating the picture of a king to be mocked.

It is, however, a timely reminder that, in the person of Jesus, God knows what it feels like to suffer because of being there and having the experience of which this incident is just a part.

As Lamar Williamson, Jr. (Mark) notes, it is the case that a – “probable reason for the prominence of mockings in Mark is that this Gospel was written for Christians who were themselves undergoing ridicule and abuse for their faith. They could identify with Jesus, because Jesus had identified with them.”

I wonder how we would stand up to persecution. I wonder how we stand up to being laughed at or having our thinking and beliefs dismissed because we are people of faith. I wonder even how appropriately (and graciously) we respond to criticism.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 15:1-15

The sorry saga continues as the trumped-up charge allows the religious leaders to dispatch Jesus to the Roman governor in order that he might attract a punishment that was far greater than they were able to inflict. They want him dealt with once and for all, and that meant death. Pilate, according to Mark, does not take this matter terribly seriously. He asks Jesus about being the king of the Jews and about all the charges that the religious leaders are now bringing. Jesus remains silent, and a somewhat disinterested Pilate is described as amazed.

However, there is just a hint that Pilate might have preferred not to sign his death warrant. He makes use of a custom by which the governor would release a prisoner at festival time, and gives the crowd the choice of Jesus or a murderer named Barabbas. But it is not difficult to stir up a crowd and the chief priests have some expertise in influencing things their way. The shout becomes that Barabbas should be freed. I wonder if there are times when we have gone with the crowd, but really should have taken a different line.

Pilate has one more check as he asks what should happen to Jesus. The response comes back: crucify him! Despite his earlier comment about the charges against him, Pilate asks a question about what Jesus has done wrong. The question is not answered, but the death penalty is demanded. Pilate is not going to take chances with a crowd in this mood. Jesus is not worth it to him. He releases Barabbas and has Jesus flogged, before sending him to crucifixion, and he does not seem to have any qualms about it. I wonder what we would have done in Pilate’s place.

Joseph O’Hanlon (Mark My Words) comments on the different ways in which Pilate is portrayed – “the Pilate of Matthew who washes his hands of complicity in the death of an innocent man, the Pilate of Luke who finds nothing deserving of death, indeed, no crime at all, in this man, the Pilate of John who discusses endlessly with Jesus on the finer points of theological issues, is not the Pilate of history. Rather, he is the Pilate of Christian propaganda, the Pilate Christians would like to present to the Gentile world. But stories of Pilate’s reluctance to condemn an innocent man, stories of a weak-willed man overcome by a hostile and vindictive mob are far distant from the real Pilate. Mark’s Pilate may be nearer the callous truth.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:66-72

How could this happen? I wonder how often there are things in our relationship with God about which we could say: how could this happen? Peter is challenged by a servant-girl. She noticed him warming himself beside the fire in the courtyard. Recognising him, she challenges Peter: you were with him, that man from Nazareth. But Peter immediately denies any connection. He does not want to risk getting caught up in what is happening to Jesus, though neither does he want to completely disappear as then he won’t know what has happened.

Certain that she recognised him, the girl is unconvinced by Peter’s denial and begins to point him out to some of the other folk standing around as one of the companions of the man who has just been arrested. Peter again denies any connection to Jesus. Then, he is also challenged by one of the bystanders who emphasises his accusation by commenting on Peter’s Galilean accent. I wonder what are the things that give us away, and whether they do so in a good or a bad way.

Peter remains adamant. I do not know him! Then follows one of those extremely poignant moments. The cock crows for the second time, and Peter remembers how Jesus had predicted his triple denial before the cock’s second crowing. No wonder he broke down and wept. I wonder what makes us weep.

Tom Wright (Mark for Everyone) helps us understand just a little of the significance of what is happening. He comments – “the detailed description of Peter’s failure highlights the solitariness of Jesus. Betrayed by one associate, forsaken by ten more, and now publicly and bitterly renounced by his closest friend; he stands alone, defenceless … what Jesus has to do now, he has to do all by himself. No one else can give their life as a ransom for many.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:53-65

Having been arrested, Jesus is taken to appear before the council of religious leaders, and they desperately try to find a charge that will validly stick. We might have assumed that they had carefully worked out how they were going to ensure his condemnation, but that is clearly not the case, as they struggle to find suitable testimony against him.

Just one of the disciples is mentioned in this section, Peter. Despite his failings, Peter has not completely disappeared. He is trying to remain incognito, but he does follow, although at a distance and we see him warming his hands at the fire which the guards have to keep them warm. Peter does want to know how the story ends, but he is not going to intervene. I wonder whether there are situations in which we lie low instead of being bold for God.

Back in council, the problem is that they are making it up, and it is therefore difficult to identify two concurring stories. In despair or fury, or both, the high priest finally tears his clothes and declares that the normal rules of testimony do not apply. There is no need for two agreeing witnesses because Jesus is – allegedly – an identified blasphemer. So, Jesus is condemned and maltreated. He is spat at, hit and beaten. They mock him by urging him to prophesy. In fact, that is exactly what is happening, an enacted prophecy.

As Ched Myers (Binding the Strong Man) comments – “they ridicule him, commanding him to “play the prophet”. This is the first instance of mockery that ironically utters the truth, for Jesus’ words are being fulfilled even as his opponents speak; indeed his prediction of Peter’s threefold denial comes to pass in the very next episode. But the real prophetic vocation lies not in predicting events, but in fidelity to the script of biblical radicalism. This, Jesus is “pommelled” by the attendants – an allusion to Isaiah’s Suffering Servant. Truly Jesus is a prophet, for he is being dishonoured by his own people (cf. 6:4).”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:43-52

 Things now move quickly. Even before Jesus has finished what he was saying, Judas arrives with what appears to be something of a mob sent by the religious leaders. They have come to arrest Jesus, and they are not taking any chances with regard to possible resistance, and so they are armed with swords and clubs.

With great irony, the moment of betrayal is marked by a kiss as Judas uses that as a means of identifying just which one is Jesus. I wonder what are the ways in which we betray Jesus.

So, Jesus is arrested and there is a relatively small scuffle. One of those with Jesus draws a sword, though we might wonder how it was that any of Jesus’ companions happened to have a sword. We have been told that it was just Peter, James and John who accompanied Jesus to Gethsemane, so it presumably one of these three who carries out this violent act. Indeed, John’s Gospel records it as being Peter, though the other three gospels, while all mentioning the incident, are silent on the matter of the perpetrator’s identity.

Jesus simply asks the arresting party why they have come in such force, and in this unusual way, given that he was readily accessible to them while openly teaching in the temple. To the three disciples, the game is up, and so they flee, as do any other Jesus supporters who might be hovering in the background – and we know there was at least one because of the reference to the young man who was grabbed and escaped by leaving them holding his clothes and running off naked. We cannot be sure who this was, but some suggest it was Mark, the writer of this gospel, giving us this detail in order to say, ‘I was there.’ I wonder how quickly we would have run off.

Brendan Byrne (A Costly Freedom) offers an interesting thought on our place in this scene with his comment about the young man who ran off naked. He says – “My own suggestion would be that the young man is a symbolic figure representing believers who have followed Jesus and received their baptismal robe but who, when discipleship has meant arrest and the threat of death, have abandoned their baptismal allegiance and become deserters.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:32-42

 Visiting Gethsemane provided some of the most memorable moments of my two visits to the Holy Land. The garden sits at the foot of the Mount of Olives, just a short distance from the now sealed Golden Gate to the city of Jerusalem. Its ancient olive trees make it a cool and dark place. It is indeed a place that speaks of prayer, of suffering, of betrayal, of being overcome by sleep. This is the place of that tremendous phrase – not what I want, but what you want.

It was the end of a long day during a tense time and they had just shared dinner. It is not entirely surprising that, when Jesus went off to pray, the accompanying disciples, the inner circle of Peter, James and John, failed to keep watch and fell asleep. We might expect that they would have remained more alert owing to Jesus’ distress and agitation. But it is difficult to fight off sleep in such circumstances of tiredness after a good meal, and they failed. What is surprising is that it happened three times. Jesus is in anguish of prayer, and the disciples sleep. In some ways it is a reversal, though unacceptably so, of when Jesus slept through the first part of the storm as they sailed across Lake Galilee.

It is significant that, as Douglas Hare (Mark) points out – “here we see that Jesus was not God’s robot, moving without question or emotion towards his death on the cross.” Jesus is both human and divine and here struggles desperately with what faces him. Of course, he will do what God wills, but if there is another way, aside from what is now looking inevitable, then he is ready to take it. As Hare states – “the passage presents Jesus as a healthy young person who wants to live, not die.” Hare adds the point that – “Mark presents the agony of Gethsemane as a testing of Jesus’ willingness to conform his will to God’s will.”

However, although the question is raised, this is not a serious wobble. Jesus is on a path that needs to be followed, and he tells his disciples that it is time to move on. Why? It is because he is about to be betrayed.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:26-31

 A hymn, and out to the Mount of Olives and, as they go, Jesus mentions that they will all desert him. It certainly seems likely that tension was mounting and they must have wondered just what might be round the corner, but this was surely an unexpected comment.

Peter, in particular, reacts strongly, though it is likely that he was voicing the sentiments that, for the moment, they all shared. He is adamant that he would not dream of abandoning Jesus, speaking up, as he does so often, but, again as elsewhere, making a comment that does not fit. Jesus tells Peter that, not only will he abandon him, but that he will deny him, an action that will take place three times before the cock crows. Peter simply cannot conceive of that happening, and he vigorously rebuts the comment that Jesus has made.

However, as all this moves towards being played out, it is worth remembering the challenges faced by the disciples, the mistakes they made, but that none of this eliminated their role in future participation in the mission initiated by Jesus.

As Donald English (The Message of Mark) comments – “The story of Peter’s protestation of loyalty to Jesus makes sad reading for us, knowing as we do what will eventually take place. That Peter and the others meant what they said is not in doubt. The mistake they made was to be too confident in their ability to stand faithfully on their own when the battle became fiercest. Yet, despite their coming failure, they will not be given up. The message from the risen Christ will be for ‘his disciples and Peter’ (16:7).”

I wonder if there are point at which we are too confident and, if so, what we need to learn.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:22-25

Mark tells of that special moment within the meal that Jesus and his disciples are sharing when Jesus takes, in turn, bread and wine and gives them a very particular significance. He takes some bread, a loaf, and blesses it. Having done that, he breaks it and gives them each a piece – this is my body. He then takes a cup of wine. He gives thanks to God for the cup of wine. They then pass it round, and each drink from it. This indicates a new promise, a new covenant and he talks of it being poured out.

This profoundly significant moment has led to one of the most often repeated elements of church life. As a minister of word and sacraments, I have long since lost track of how many times I have remembered this moment and celebrated this sacrament. I have done so in many different settings, and in a number of different ways. One memorable occasion was in a remote part of Panama. We arrived by boat on a beautiful beach, called Caya Paloma (Dove Beach) and beside the beach was the tiny Methodist Chapel, in which I preached and actually celebrated both the sacraments of Baptism and of Communion one Sunday in the early part of 1994. Another particularly memorable occasion was in December 2011 at Abu-Ghosh, one of a number of villages that claims to be the original Emmaus, where, in the chapel of the Benedictine monastery, I had the joy of concelebrating with a Palestinian colleague who spoke the words of distribution in the original Aramaic.

This is perhaps the high point in what seems to have been a challenging meal as Jesus and the disciples share these elements in this very special way for the first time in Christian history.

It is interesting, and significant, that this happens during conversations about how the disciples are going to fail Jesus. It is a telling reminder that God loves us as we are, and accepts, blesses and uses the messy chaos of our lives. As Megan McKenna (On Your Mark: Reading Mark in the Shadow of the Cross) reminds us – “Jesus ate with sinners and the unworthy. His mercy and forgiveness were and still are the great marks of his ministry and practice.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:12-21

Jesus and his disciples prepare to eat the Passover meal together. Overall, the question as to whether this ‘last supper’ was a Passover meal, or not, is not entirely clear. There is certainly a wish by some of the writers to portray it as such, and Mark is one of these. As Joseph O’Hanlon (Mark My Words) points out, Mark is – “concerned to link the Last Supper with the Passover meal and he plainly says that the last meal Jesus had with the twelve was the festival meal.” If it was, that is theologically helpful in linking Jesus, as the Lamb of God, an identification which one of the other gospel writers puts right at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry as part of an announcement by John the Baptist (John 1:29), with the lamb of the Passover meal.

However, what happened as this meal progressed is what matters and whether it was an actual Passover meal is far less critical. In any event, an unnamed pair are sent ahead to make the preparations. It would seem that some kind of arrangement has been made, though the means of identifying it are rather random. It all seems fine other than the fact that a seemingly chance encounter with a particular individual is to be the means of identifying the location. Certainly, water jars would more normally be carried by women, so the man would readily be noticed. The question is around how it could be assumed that he would be there at the right moment.

However, it does all happen as has been explained and, in the evening, the rest of the group arrive with Jesus for the meal.

We can imagine the group sharing food and conversation. For once they are eating on their own without others present, not even a host. We can imagine there is a degree of tension. It is just a few days since the hosannas of (what we know as) Palm Sunday, but also since the disruption that Jesus had caused in the temple courtyards amongst the moneychangers and animal sacrifice sellers. The disciples clearly did not know what was about to happen, but there must have been a sense of foreboding.

Jesus then intensifies any such mood by talking about betrayal. Eleven of them could not believe that this was possible. Surely not. But one knows differently. The relationship is about to be deepened with a symbolic sharing of bread and wine but, for the moment, the point is simply made that the sharing of the meal is not a guarantee of commitment and loyalty. As O’Hanlon comments, the fact that the naming of what Judas is going to do – “takes place in the context of a meal and on a festive occasion adds to its squalid treachery.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:10-11

In stark contrast with the devotion expressed by the woman who poured perfume on Jesus’ head, we now have reference to the preparations for betrayal made by Judas, who takes on this role despite being one of the twelve disciples. We have to assume that Judas is not happy with the direction in which things have been going to the extent that he is prepared to deliver Jesus into the hands of the religious authorities, so that they can do their worst and get rid of him.

We can imagine that the chief priests were delighted when Judas approached them. There is nothing to suggest that Judas was looking for money, but such an act has its price and the chief priests are very willing to make the payment. This would give them the chance to get Jesus in custody without attracting the attention of the crowd. I wonder in what ways we betray Jesus, and how readily we do so.

I wonder what really motivated Judas. We can only assume that, in some sense, as Kim Huat Tan (Mark) expresses it, that Judas arrives at “the belief that Jesus’ messianic programme is wrongheaded and dangerous. It is wrongheaded because it involves death; it is dangerous because it speaks of God’s profligate love.” We can imagine that all of the disciples were juggling many different emotions, and something, very possibly what Tan calls “a fanatical intent to do what he thinks is right for the nation” tips Judas over the edge, and so he abandons the group and the mission that they now share with Jesus in order, he surely hopes, to get the nation on track. It may be even, as has often been suggested, that Judas simply hoped to provoke Jesus into the direct action that was needed in order to restore the people to their rightful place in the land. It was all very well turning over a few tables and disrupting the business that was taking place in the temple courtyards, but what was needed was some leadership that would end the Roman occupation.

I wonder if we ever get into a place where we think God should do it differently and, if so, what we might do (or not do) in that situation.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:3-9

As so often, Jesus is being hosted for a meal. This is at Bethany, and he is at the home of a man named Simon, who is identified as a leper. Jesus was not concerned about the background of those who hosted him. There are other people around and, in this instance, Jesus is approached by a woman who has brought an expensive jar of perfume. This woman is an unlikely candidate for being an example of faith and commitment, and her attitude and action makes a stark contrast with what we see of the male disciples during these days when they are in the Jerusalem area with the Passover crowds. I wonder whether we are ready to learn from unlikely people.

This woman certainly gets her action noticed. She breaks open the jar and pours the ointment on Jesus’ head. One assumes this had an immediate impact on everyone’s sense of smell. It usually takes just a drop of perfume to produce a pleasant aroma. This act will have produced a nice, but powerful, fragrance. Everyone will have been aware that something unusual had happened.

It certainly annoyed some of those who were present, and they suggest that the perfume could have been sold to raise funds for the poor. The implication is that this is a waste of money. But Jesus rather identifies it as a special act of love, and as something to be commended. He comments that the poor will always be there, and so they will. That could appear as a rather cold comment but is probably more a statement of fact – and a reminder that we are not actually able to solve the world’s problems. As Bonnie Bowman Thurston (Preaching Mark) comments – “we all need a little perfume in this life. And Jesus not only allows this, but commends it.”

Jesus recognises the generosity of this woman. She has anointed his body for burial, a comment that was probably not really understood. It is also interesting that he mentions that her story will be told because of what she has done.

If just one thing were said of us, I wonder what we might hope that would be. I wonder whether we ever engage in acts of extravagant generosity. I wonder how we express our love for God, and in a way that others can see.

Of course, this story is not just about giving, but also about receiving, and Jesus models something important for us. As Thurston asks – “I wonder how many of us could be Jesus in the story, could accept such an act of love and generosity. Jesus sets an example for us in allowing people to love him.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 14:1-2

There are two important things here. One is the timing, and the other is the intention of the chief priests and the scribes. It is two days before Passover and the festival of Unleavened Bread. Jerusalem would therefore have been busy, as pilgrims arrived to be part of the festival celebrations in the capital city. It was not business as usual because of this influx of people and, of course, Jesus and the disciples were part of the throng visiting Jerusalem at this important point in the religious calendar.

The other thing mentioned is the plotting against Jesus by the religious leaders. They are aware of his popularity and so they want to tread carefully. The plan appears to be to make their move as soon as the festival is over. It may well be that they hoped that what they were doing would not ne noticed in the flurry of activity as the many visiting pilgrims started their journeys to their various homes. No doubt there were all sorts of things happening to support the needs and interests of the visitors.

I wonder if we ever allow ourselves to be distracted from important things, especially when there is a lot happening.

Of course, it is not going to work out quite according to their plan. As we will discover, that timetable is not entirely correct. Mark makes the point about timing because he wants to emphasise that God’s timing is going to take priority.

Denis McBride (The Gospel of Mark: A Reflective Commentary) reflects on the scheming of the religious leaders, noting – “things turn out differently – perhaps because the offer of Judas precipitated their decision? Whatever the reason, Mark’s point is clear: in spite of their clandestine plans, the Temple clergy are not in charge of the chronology of events; Jesus will die during the feast of great liberation.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 13:28-37

The warnings continue, as does the call for watchfulness. The fig tree is used as an example, but in a different way from the previous encounter that Jesus and the disciples had with a fig tree. This time the appearance of leaves on the branches of the fig tree is cited as an indication of the proximity of summer.

The main message is that of a call for alertness. We should not be trying to work out what are sometimes called the ‘signs of the times’, not least because we are almost bound to get it wrong. We are not called to predict the future, but we are called to live in the right way, so that we can respond appropriately to whatever may happen. The image is of one who is not ready, or who misses things, because of being asleep; and that is contrasted with the person who is alert and awake, ready for whatever may happen.

I wonder if there are things to which we are not as alert as we should be.

As Eduard Schweizer (The Good News according to Mark) says of this section – “it summons us to wakefulness” looking for the person who “always stands accountable before the coming Lord … being ready for the Lord at all times.”

The point is to be prepared and ready for what God asks of us.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 13:14-27

The pictures of disaster and alarm continue. The descriptions are of events that, as Morna Hooker (The Gospel according to Saint Mark) puts it, bring – “terrible suffering for those involved” but are “like many other disasters which have taken place in the course of history”.

The risk with such passages is that we apply them to current events and draw conclusions that are neither needed nor appropriate. I am writing these notes at a time of pandemic and many are wondering what are the implications, both short and long term, of the current situation as we talk about a ‘new normal’, but at a point where it has not arrived as things are still some distance from settling down. History is full of difficult stuff that hurts people and, in some ways, this is simply stating that. As Christians we rightly assert that all things are in God’s hands, but it is invariably unhelpful to try and find hidden meanings or make predictions around what particular events imply. It is good to be alert. It is good to look for what we should be doing and saying, but that should not include attempting to predict the course of history.

The reference to the coming of the Son of Man is a way of promising God’s care. Mark here addresses his readers, originally the members of the relatively early church, very likely facing the possibility of persecution and, as Hooker says – “this passage is an assurance that, whatever sufferings they may have to endure, their faithfulness to Jesus will be rewarded on the Last Day, when they are acknowledged by the Son of Man.” We all sometimes go through periods of distress but, come what may, God is with us.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 13:1-13

Mark 13 is often banded the ‘little apocalypse’ as it contains a number of alarming predictions. In the first section Jesus foretells the destruction of the temple, something that is later linked to the fall of Jerusalem and the destroying of the temple in 70CE. The disciples’ view of the temple, with its large stones, is contrasted with the devastating picture of these being broken up and knocked down. The description is of a time of chaos and fear. (This may reflect some of the persecution experienced by the early church.)

This is a difficult chapter, engaging with concepts that tend to be far from our experience. However, if nothing else, it reminds us, as Douglas Hare (Mark) puts it, that – “Christians are to be constantly on guard against whatever might distract them from being faithful to Jesus, and are to proclaim his gospel everywhere.”

The essential challenge is to stand up for what is right, no matter the threats, opposition or persecution that have to be faced. There will be difficult things to confront, but God’s people should not be alarmed.

People will make all sorts of claims, Disasters will take place, both natural and those provoked by our inhumanity to each other. These difficulties are not something that can be avoided. As Hare says – “preaching the good news will not protect Jesus’ followers against the world’s hatred.”

But it is worth standing firm through all of this, and it is possible. The one who endures to the end will be saved. I wonder what are the things that make us feel threatened. I wonder if we turn to God as we should.

Luke 22:24-30

The disciples are again arguing about which of them should be regarded as the greatest.  And again the normal status system is rejected.  They need to learn that the leader should become like the servant.  They need to learn that the greatest should have no more honour than the least.  They have still not learned this lesson about service being the path to greatness.  They are still looking for power and supremacy, rather than simply taking their place and doing what they can to serve.  It is one of the saddest things in the Gospel story that the disciples could argue about who should be recognised as most important in the very shadow of the Cross.  What did it matter who exactly had which place?  And yet, though it is easy for us to condemn them, it is equally easy for us to do the same kind of thing.  We want our place, our position, our status.

Service is so important that it is of the essence of the Kingdom.  When we get caught up in thoughts and arguments about greatness, not only do we fail to serve as we ought, but we do God a grave disservice by letting him down and discarding his priorities.

The world needs service, and the world knows it.  A garage once claimed: we will crawl under your car oftener and get ourselves dirtier than any of our competitors.  One of the strange facts of life is that one place where there are often arguments about place and status is the church.  The world needs, and recognises, service.  Sometimes the church messes up by just arguing.  Let’s try and avoid that.

We might put it this way.  We can focus on giving.  Or we can focus on getting.  But the strange thing is that, if we do focus on getting, there are so many important and valuable things that we will miss out on.  There are different ways in which we can explain this, but they include what Jesus said in Luke 9:24/5 – For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will save it.  What good is it for you to gain the whole world, and yet lose or forfeit your very self?

Jesus, as you would expect, does not approve of the arguments about greatness.  He tries to point through and beyond them.  He points out that the greatest must be like the youngest and the leader must be the servant.  Jesus calls us to perfection, even though he knows we won’t make it.  But that’s the aim.  Who really is the greatest?  Where is true greatness?  God may well surprise us as we grapple with that question.  But what matters for us is not a call to greatness, but a call to service.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 12:41-44

Watching people make their offerings might today be considered an invasion of privacy, but that is exactly what Jesus does here. In something more reminiscent of my African experience when, in both Zimbabwe and Zambia, I have watched, and joined in, as everyone dances their way to the front and to the offertory plate, though the amount given tends to be relatively private. Here Jesus notices many rich people putting in large sums. Presumably there were also many whose offerings were more moderate in line with their means. But then the spotlight is turned on a poor widow who is only able to contribute a tiny amount. In monetary terms her offering is of very little value, but the gift is all she has, and so actually amounts to the most sacrificial giving possible. She has frequently been commended for her amazing generosity.

But is the point that Jesus is making rather different? Is this, in fact, a further attack on the demands of the Temple system? Is this, as Ched Myers (Binding the Strong Man)  suggests – a story of a widow being impoverished by her obligations to the temple cultus”? Myers further suggests that this has been “long mishandled as a quaint vignette about the superior piety of the poor.”

On this reading, the suggestion is that nobody should be put in such an unacceptable position. God surely cannot want this lady to give away the tiny and inadequate means of survival that she possesses. I wonder if there are situations in which we have unreasonable expectations of some others.

Her sacrifice may appear commendable, but it could rather be seen as foolhardy, and, whichever of those is the case, surely there is something deeply flawed in a system which requires this donation from such an impoverished widow. Perhaps Jesus is actually returning to the points he was trying to make when he chased away those who were selling and buying in the temple precincts and overturned the tables of the moneychangers. Perhaps this story is not about generosity, but about exploitation. As Myers points out – “the temple has robbed this woman of her very means of livelihood. Like the scribal class, it no longer protects widows, but exploits them.” I wonder if there are places where we should be challenging exploitation.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 12:38-40

Here, as Leith Fisher (Will you follow me?) puts it – “Jesus goes on to complain that scribal piety is a cloak for the oppression of widows and the powerless of the land.”

The promotion of justice, and in particular the matter of looking out for the widow and the orphan, is a strong element within the Biblical tradition. That is Jesus’ concern here. It seems likely that the background to this outburst is that customarily the scribes would be those who would look out for the vulnerable in society and ensure that their rights were protected. They were trusted figures as part of the religious leadership. Jesus’ claim is that they use this aspect of their role for their own financial advantage. A commission would be payable and appropriate, but too easily inflated. Very possibly this is part of Jesus’ broader questioning of religious custom and whether it is truly in line with what God seeks.

The scribes, with their long robes and lengthy prayers, put on the appearance of being excellent models of religious practice. However, the outward show can disguise a use of the position for personal advantage. The trusted individual too easily abuses that trust. As Fisher describes it – “scribal piety is being attacked and debunked as a thin veil for economic opportunism and exploitation. The fat cats of the Temple system are scathingly exposed.” This is to be condemned, and that is exactly what Jesus does.

I wonder where we might see position or role being used in a way that does not really seek the best for those who are allegedly being helped. I wonder where we would identify as the main places where we see power being abused.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 12:35-37

The direct questioning has stopped for the moment, but Jesus continues to address some of the key issues that are relevant to the kind of things that have been discussed. The question on which he comments here is as to whether the Messiah is the son of David. One of the commonest titles for the expected Messiah was indeed son of David. The people were looking for a deliverer believing this person  would come from David’s line, and be in David’s mould. David was a great warrior king and, particularly at the time of Jesus when they were under Roman occupation, it is not surprising that the hope was for a military Messiah who would overthrow Roman rule.

Jesus here asks how the Messiah can be David’s son on the grounds that David calls him Lord, which is not how one normally refers to a son. However, perhaps this should be seen at a deeper level, and as an indication that Jesus’ Messiahship is not going to fit the conventional mould. After all, a Messiah who gets captured and killed is a contradiction in terms. As William Barclay (Daily Study Bible – The Gospel of Mark) says – “what Jesus is doing is this – he is not denying that the Messiah is the son of David, nor is he saying that he is not the son of David. What he is saying is that he is the son of David – and far more. The Coming One was not only David’s Son – he was David’s Lord.” This issue is not, as in other matters, that Jesus rejects what has been stated, but that he reinterprets it, as tradition has taken things in the wrong direction.

I wonder if we are caught up in any traditions that have gained unintended meanings or unintended consequences.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 12:28-34

Theological dialogue continues as yet another question is put to Jesus. This time the questioner is identified as one of the scribes, and it is stated that he was impressed by Jesus’ answers. Therefore, we can suppose that this was a genuine question rather than, as has been the case with several others, an attempt to trip up Jesus and get him to incriminate himself by saying something unacceptable.

The question is about the commandments, one of the fundamentals of the faith. Which commandment is the first of all? Jesus begins with the Shema. This prayer quotes Deuteronomy 6:4-5 and is one of the fundamental expressions of Jewish belief. Hear, O Israel: The Lord is our God, the Lord alone. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might. This was recited by every Jew as part of both morning and evening prayers.

But Jesus then proceeds to answer a question that, arguably, has not been asked as he identifies the second commandment. In doing this he cites Leviticus 19:18 – you shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against any of your people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself: I am the Lord.

Surely the point is that these two are inseparable. Megan McKenna (On Your Mark: Reading Mark in the Shadow of the Cross) summarises this – “Jesus’ proclamation states clearly that love of God and love of others cannot be separated. Indifference to others in need is indifference to God. Because of the incarnation, Jesus becoming one of us, all human beings are one in the sacrament of obedience to God. What we do or don’t do for others, we do or don’t do for God.”

The scribe recognises the truth of Jesus’ answer and says so. He can see the importance of these two and that they are linked, but also that they are more important than all the details of religious practice that can become the priority of those who claim to be entirely committed to God. In brief, loving your neighbour is more important than offering the prescribed sacrifice. Jesus, in turn, recognises that this man is well on track towards a proper understanding of God’s Kingdom values. I wonder how we identify those who are our neighbour and how we engage with them.

Now, for the moment, there are no more questions for Jesus.

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 12:18-27

Awkward questions continue as Jesus is confronted with a rather unlikely scenario by one of the groups of religious leaders, those known as the Sadducees. Indeed, we could say that they try to involve Jesus in significant theological debate.

This particular group held that there was no resurrection and so, as we might expect, that is the issue which they tackle in their dialogue with Jesus. They pick on the custom that held that in the case of a married man who died, leaving a wife but no child, his brother, assuming he had one, should marry the widow and raise any children as though they belonged to the deceased brother. They imagine a situation in which seven brothers are each, in turn, faced with this situation; and they wonder whose wife the woman will be in the resurrection as she has been married to all seven.

Jesus’ response effectively suggests that it is the wrong question. He points out that resurrection life will be very different and that it will not include a human institution like marriage. He thus closes down the debate, though also mentioning that God is concerned with the living, not with the dead. Resurrection is, by definition, part of the sphere of the living but we cannot know, and do not need to worry, exactly how things will be.

Jesus refers to the patriarchs and to God’s identification as their God when he spoke with Moses from the burning bush. The point is that God is God of all, and, by inference, we may suggest that there is not a great deal to be gained by worrying about tiny details. As Morna Hooker (The Gospel according to Saint Mark) says – “if God is the God of the patriarchs (and of those who came after them), he does not cease to be their God at their death; experience of fellowship with God demands belief in some kind of continuing relationship with him.”

Reflecting on Mark's Gospel - Mark 12:13-17

The series of mutually challenging conversations with religious leaders continues as a group of them try to put Jesus in a difficult position with respect to what he says on the matter of paying taxes. The record of this encounter describes how they make an approach to Jesus in which they flatter him. Perhaps this was for the sake of the crowd. We have already been told that they are concerned about a likely adverse reaction from the people in the event that they make any attempt to prevent Jesus from continuing his ministry and teaching.

Now the tactic appears to be that they should commend him, appearing to recognise the good things he is doing and saying, but then undermine him by asking a question which will provoke him to say something that loses the sympathy of the crowd. They will then be able to move against him without the same fear of retribution.

Jesus, however, beats them at their own game with his careful and appropriate answer. He first prepares the ground by requesting a coin, a denarius. He asks whose image is on the coin and so is able to draw the conclusion that the coin belongs to the emperor whose image it bears. Of course, God has priority, but that does not mean that we have no other obligations and Jesus carefully and powerfully makes that point. Give to the emperor the things that are the emperor’s, and to God the things that are God’s.

I wonder how easily we judge our obligations to the state and to civic authorities. I wonder what bases we use to determine our attitude to the difficult issues of our day. (Jesus’ contemporaries were unhappy about having to pay taxes to the occupying Romans, which gives this incident added significance.)

In this encounter Jesus’ opponents try to force him to make a political comment, hoping that will be damaging to him. They succeed in the former aim, but not the latter. As Denis McBride (The Gospel of Mark: A Reflective Commentary) notes – “in his reply Jesus gives his own teaching, in line with traditional Judaism: it is for people to evaluate whether in demanding the poll tax, Caesar is reflecting the things of God. That evaluation, which is always a complex one, continues in every age.” I wonder how we decide what are the things on which we need to speak up or even, in some cases, engage in some form of practical action.