Lectionary Year B, Proper 18
Gospel Text: Mark 7:24-37
Introduction
None of us
are born in isolation from society. From birth, we are a part of some kind of
social group. From these social groups we absorb and learn many things; some
good, some neutral, and some bad. Some of the things are taught and modeled
explicitly, but many more we absorb implicitly. One of those things is how
society values different kinds of people, and more specifically, how my
in-group views people that are outside of my group. As we grow and interact
with different groups, we have positive and negative experiences that can
reinforce stereotypes for good or bad. While most of us learn and know
intellectually that we should not look down on people different from us, we may
still harbor fear, dislike, or feelings of superiority that unconsciously
influence our actions.
Many of my
childhood and teen years were lived among predominantly White communities.
Whether accurate or not, as my young brain looked around, I observed that White
people appeared to be more affluent and clearly were the majority. One result
of this was that I subconsciously developed anti-Asian sentiment within myself,
even though I am clearly Asian.
I think that
most strongly reinforcing this idea occurred during a few of my middle school
years and a year in high school, when our family spent some time in Singapore
as missionaries. The missionaries, who were nearly all Western and White, had
their own school for their children, in nice air-conditioned buildings and
rooms in a compound just for them.
All of this
added up so that for a good number of decades I tried to avoid associating with
other Asians and preferred the company of White groups.
But even
within the broad category of Asians, I also absorbed a national and ethnic
hierarchy that placed my people, Japanese, at the top and other Asians further
down the ladder. Although I had close Asian friends that were not Japanese, I
held to negative stereotypes when thinking about other groups as a whole. Even
though I would have never thought of myself as racist, I thought it was fine
and good to maintain internal hierarchies of race and nationality, and to have
negative ideas about groups that I didn’t identify with.
I bring all
this up because a human individual’s social environment, their culture, and
their upbringing all contribute to what they assume is moral and ethical. What
they learn and absorb from their in-group defines much of what is assumed to be
right. I didn’t think any of what I’ve mentioned was wrong. I simply believed
and accepted that that’s just how the world worked. I bring this up because
many decades later, as I’ve learned and matured, I am finally at a point where
I can begin to see how my upbringing and the experiences I had shaped me and
can take conscious steps to break away from recognized negative aspects.
Was Jesus Exempt from Human Upbringing?
Was Jesus
exempt from experiencing this part of humanity?
Dr. James F.
McGrath, professor of New Testament Language and Literature at Butler University
writes,
“Was he [Jesus] entirely free from human biases in his
upbringing and culture? As a genuine human being, I think there is no way he
could have had a human upbringing in which he learned language, culture,
customs, and values, and yet be entirely free of all prejudices and biases.”[1]
And Loye
Ashton in the commentary Feasting on the Word writes,
“To be the Son of God, the Messiah must suffer, not only at
the hands of those of us who do not understand him, but also under of the
conditions of existence, the challenge of the human condition itself. To be
otherwise would not allow Jesus to be fully human… Mark provides an interesting
way of seeing how the divine and the human can be completely combined in the
life of Jesus of Nazareth.”[2]
Jesus and Ethnic Traditions
Today’s
gospel text is the middle of a series of stories arranged by Mark to show how
Jesus went from caring for the Jews, his in-group, to breaking rigidly
established boundaries of purity, religion, ethnicity and race to include all
humanity in his care. The Syrophoenician woman is the fulcrum on which this
shift occurs.
Up to this
point the series of stories show Jesus challenging traditional Jewish norms and
even disregarding purity codes. But these were all debates within Judaism and having
disagreements or practicing differently did not automatically place one outside
of the community.
To offer
God’s divine power to someone outside of the Jewish community would be
something else entirely. That is the challenge that Jesus is confronted with
when the Syrophoenician (or Canaanite; c.f. Matthew 15:22) woman comes to him
with a request to cast the unclean spirit out of her daughter. This was not
only a Gentile, but a woman; a woman with an unclean daughter, and even more problematic,
a descendant of the Canaanites, Israel’s mortal enemy.
And that is
the point at which Jesus hesitates. He seems to have some intellectual
recognition that God’s mercy should go to all of humanity, but his social norms
acquired through his upbringing seems to erect an emotional block. Jesus
responds as a Jewish man would be expected to respond to a request from a Gentile
woman. It is rude and insulting, but simultaneously, it is an entirely
acceptable and expected response.
Rev. Marcea
Paul of the Episcopal Church of the Good Shepherd, in Austin, Texas writes,
“We believe and profess that Jesus is fully human and fully
divine, and this week, we encounter Jesus in his full humanity.”[3]
We don’t
have the time to go into the problem of this apparent portrait of a
less-than-perfect Jesus. For now I hope it is sufficient to note that the
problem may lie in our overreliance on John’s gospel and some of the
Christological texts in the epistles as fully explaining Jesus, and through
them our assumptions about what it means to be perfect and without sin. From
the quotes I’ve already used, there are biblical scholars and practicing
pastors who are raising the problem of an underdeveloped doctrine of Jesus’
humanity.
Jesus Challenged
Jesus
responds as a Jewish man might be expected to respond. But the woman, instead
of going away, as would have been expected, she responds with a challenge to
Jesus’ response, thus invoking an honor contest – again, something that is
completely unexpected across social, ethnic, and gender boundaries.[4]
Her
response, “Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs,”
(7:28) get the better of Jesus. This is the only story recorded in the gospels
where Jesus loses an honor contest, and it is to a Gentile woman. Whereas in
Matthew’s account Jesus praises the woman’s faith, in Mark’s account Jesus
recognizes the superiority of the woman’s reason and logic.
In
commenting on this the Fortress Biblical Preaching Commentaries: Mark
reads,
The Syrophoenician woman’s reply in v.28 is startling. The
fact that she talks back is itself a sign of boundary-crossing persistence… She
engages Jesus in a clever, rhetorical riposte that while not undoing the
offense of naming, breaks and thus bests its logic… The gentile woman works
cleverly within the metaphor that Jesus uses. But in doing so, she breaks it
open for newness and healing.[5]
The woman of
this story is the hero. She extracts honor from Jesus, and he is compelled to
accede to the woman’s request.
What Jesus Learned
Jesus had been
pushing and crossing boundaries within his own Jewish tradition. But the
Syrophoenician woman challenged boundaries that defined ethnic, national,
social, religious, and gender separations. She challenged Jesus to break those
boundaries as ones that were hindering a broader mission to all of humanity. In
healing her daughter, Jesus appears to have learned that there were far more
traditional boundaries that would have to be broken and crossed.
The next
story where a man who is deaf and has a speech impediment is healed shows how
Jesus puts into practice what he has learned. He no longer shows reluctance to
immediately respond to a Gentile person’s needs. But Jesus’ manner of healing
in this story is strange in that he does not lay hands on the man, as was asked
of him, but rather pokes his finger into the man’s ears, spits onto his fingers
and touches the man’s tongue. It is almost as if Jesus is adopting certain
healing practices and goes through motions that were more common in the
Greco-Roman world. Karen Pidcock-Lester offers the following observation in the
commentary Feasting on the Gospels,
The significance of the spittle is unclear. Some evidence
indicates that the Greco-Roman culture viewed it as having curative effects,
while other evidence from Jewish texts indicate that it is an unclear
discharge. This would actually make a difference in how one views the healing
act. Given that Mark has been picturing Jesus breaking boundaries, I would
suggest that it is viewed in the Jewish fashion as unclean. By an unclean act
Jesus heals; this makes the boundary breaking even stronger.[6]
The final
story in this Markan sequence of narratives showing Jesus’ boundary crossings
is the Feeding of the 4,000 which takes place still in a Gentil area. In this
story, as was found in the feeding of the 5,000 which was in Jewish lands, the
Markan text includes that Jesus had compassion for the crowd which had been
with him for three days (8:2). Jesus who had compassion for the Jewish crowds,
but responded rudely to the Syrophoenician woman, comes around to having
compassion for a Gentile crowd.
What We Can Learn
Since we are
human, we don’t always know the kinds of boundaries that we hold on to. Many
are handed down through our families and the society that we are born into.
Others we might choose along life’s way.
Jesus did
not say all boundaries should be eliminated. He clearly has at least one – that
of sacrificial love for one another which is the defining marker for his people
and community.
Any boundary
that is antithetical to sacrificial love for one another is, therefore, a
boundary that should be questioned. Another might be any boundary that builds
and maintains hierarchies of power. And yet another might be any boundary that
assigns a degree of value differently from one person to another depending on
where they fall. Do our stated values always match what we hold on to
internally?
Another area
to consider is the ways in which we respond when we are externally confronted and
challenged on boundaries that we adhere to, both consciously and
subconsciously. Do we become defensive or are we open to the possibility that
we might be wrong and take corrective action?
Jesus was
crucified, at least in part because he refused to stay within what society
demanded were proper and necessary boundaries. Jesus crossed boundaries to love
those that were considered enemies by society. He not only crossed boundaries,
but he sought to remove them. One could say that Jesus was a traitor for the
cause of love. We, who claim the name of Jesus Christ and follow him, are being
asked to do no less.
[1]
Was
Jesus a Racist? | James McGrath (patheos.com) (https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/2021/09/was-jesus-racist.html)
[2]
Feasting on the Word: Year B, Volume 4, Kindle location approximately at
1716.
[3]
Crumbs
for Healing, Pentecost 15 (B) – September 5, 2021 – The Episcopal Church (https://www.episcopalchurch.org/sermon/crumbs-for-healing-pentecost-15-b-september-5-2021/)
[4]
Fortress Biblical Preaching Commentaries: Mark, p. 103-104.
[5]
Fortress, p. 104-105
[6]
Pidcock-Lester, Karen (commentary contributor). Feasting on the Gospels:
Mark. Approximate Kindle location 7608.
