The first question that popped into my mind as I looked at this week's Sabbath School lesson (Lesson 5: Gender and Discipleship) was, "What does gender have to do with discipleship?" More specifically and probably fraught with dangers of misinterpretation was, "Does being a woman (because that's what this week's lesson is about) alter any aspect of discipleship? And if so, how?"
This is perhaps my single largest objection to this week's lesson. It can be taken in so many wrong ways... First, even a casual glance in the Bible shows that the women followers and believers were never called disciples, except perhaps by inference when the gospel writers imply that there were many disciples other than the chosen Twelve. The lesson, however, states that some or all of the examples given in this week's lesson are disciples. Second, this week's lesson seems to set aside for women, the requirements and forms that were given as (in my interpretation of the lesson text) fairly strict and absolute (although I personally don't accept it to be that way) in the very first lesson.
On the one hand, I do appreciate that the lesson is moving away from the rigid view of discipleship that seemed to permeate the first four lessons. However, by doing so, I just get a very schizophrenic feeling. I'm not sure how to understand and interpret the lesson's viewpoints, assumptions, and goals.
I'll make a few observations on some of the daily lesson topics before I head into my own personal application for this week.
Sunday discussed Mary, Jesus' mother. The idea (vs. the reality) of a virgin birth (and/or of gods coming to impregnate women), according to myths of the time, was actually quite common. Egypt, Persia, India, Greece, Rome, etc. all had them. It probably isn't too far of a stretch to conjecture that quite a few young women who found themselves "unexpectedly" pregnant might have used the "a god came to me in the night..." excuse. How does this affect or change the way we might view Mary and Joseph's response to Yahweh coming to Mary? Interesting thoughts...
When we look at the attitude of Mary's acceptance of what was going to happen, I think we assume she was quite submissive and passive. But if you take the time to read through Mary's Magnificat in Luke 1:46-55, I think you'll find anything but a doormat in her words. This was a young (probably 12-14 years of age) woman who knew what she wanted to see happen in the world. She was not afraid to voice her opinions. I think we see hints of that in the places where she does reappear in the Biblical narratives.
Monday's lesson discusses a number of women who might be the closest to what the first four lessons described to be true disciples. It's interesting to note that these were all outcast women. They were considered by society to have some sort of problem that made them unwelcome. Could it be that even after they were healed and restored, they felt judgmental attitudes and preferred to stay with Jesus? Was it actually easier for them to remain with Jesus than to return home?
When we turn the focus back on Jesus, what he did was just as scandalous as associating with tax collectors and "sinners." He was with these women (from what we can infer) 24/7. Here's a single man who should have been married by now, wandering about the nation with a bunch of female groupies -- or at least that's what the "respectable" establishment would have seen. Never mind that there were other men around. Jesus was known to go away by himself... What if a prominent religious leader today started wandering around the country with men and women who lived together? I'm pretty sure some interesting rumors would get started, no matter how careful everyone in the group was.
What's interesting in the gospel accounts is that women followers of Jesus are usually portrayed as more faithful and loyal than even the chosen Twelve. Perhaps there is a lesson there... Maybe a person doesn't have to be called a disciple, or necessarily exhibit the expected behaviors of a disciple in order to be a genuine and faithful follower of Jesus. Just a thought.
Skipping on to Wednesday, this is the famous "Martha in the kitchen, where is Mary?" story. I'll skip some of the more common and obvious observations and note something a bit more obscure but no less interesting. Luke 10 is the start of Jesus' journey to Jerusalem (in the so-called Jerusalem document, Bailey, Poet and Peasant). The parallel passage occurs in Luke 18:18-30. The narrative involving Mary and Martha is the third act of a three-part narrative beginning with the lawyer's question in Luke 10:25-28. The second part is Jesus' response to the question (vv. 29-37). This is the Good Samaritan parable. The Martha and Mary narrative (vv. 38-42) is part of Luke's response to the lawyer's question.
What gets interesting is when we notice the parallel in Luke 18 as noted above. The three part series starts with the rich young ruler asking Jesus a question. The second part contains the parable of the camel and the eye of the needle. The third part involves Jesus' followers, and specifically Peter. What ties both passages (Luke 10 and 18) together is the "one thing" (10:42 and 18:22) that Jesus speaks of.
Thursday discusses the Samaritan woman at the well. Many of us have read and heard so much on this that I don't think I need to go on about it other than this one bit that I heard on the radio discussion of the lesson from Walla Walla University. Towards the end one of the professors posited a theory that this woman was not immoral as is traditionally thought. Rather, the theory goes that the woman was strong-minded and independent. Because she was quite attractive, men were attracted to her. When they married her, they tried to control and subjugate her (as was the expectations and customs of the day). However, she refused and one by one, the men divorced her. She had gotten to the point where she was disillusioned with men and relationships, so she was now just living with someone. It's an interesting twist, and one that I think could bear more relevance for women of today. It's something that today's women can identify with, whereas explicit immorality is something that most people would just dismiss as not applicable to them. Anyway, I thought it was an interesting line of thought that I think deserves some serious consideration.
Now back to some personal observations and applications. In spite of the criticism with which I opened this reflection, I actually didn't have nearly as much strong feelings against it as I did the previous four. In fact I quite enjoyed it for the most part.
I think what impressed me most with this week's lesson was when I read Luke 10:40, "But Martha was distracted..." In John 11:21-22, at Lazarus' death, Martha trusted Jesus. She was not distracted. Mary, on the other hand seemed to have lost faith. I talked about this in my sermon a couple of weeks ago. We will see that in John 12, Mary is okay again and shows some of the greatest faith in and understanding of Jesus found in the gospels.
I might sound like a broken record, but this "one thing" that Martha is missing in Luke 10, and possesses it in John 11; what Mary has in Luke 10, loses it in John 11, then regains it by John 12; I believe this is trust. It's what the rich young ruler of Luke 18 could not get himself to do.
In Luke 10, Martha is working hard to get things right in her own strength. Jesus isn't criticizing her preparations, but her obsession with it. She might trust Jesus in the big things, but when it comes to the little things, it's her duty to get things worked out. I think this is a lot like many of us. I know far too well I'm that way. If I think it's within my abilities and strength to do something, then I'm going to take full ownership and responsibility. For me, I find it much more difficult to trust God to work out the little mundane things of life than it is to trust God to work out the big things for which I know I have no control.
Discipleship is 100% commitment 100% of the time. In last week's post I made the suggestion that commitment is trust. So from this week's lesson, the lesson I believe God is trying to teach me is that I need to trust him with everything in my life, including the little things that I could, if I chose to do so, have control over. Certainly easy to say but very difficult to do.
No comments:
Post a Comment