This sermon was heard at The Federated Church in Weatherford, Oklahoma on Sunday July 3, 2016, the Fourteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time.
2Kings 5:1-14
Psalm 30
Galatians 6:7-16
Luke 10:1-11, 16-20
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
In this life, there are things we have to do. Our bosses, our parents, and even our children tell us there are things to do. Sometimes it’s society, whether the government, which is just the formal arm of society, or obligation and expectations, like keeping the lawn mowed. Often we don’t want to do them. We’d rather laze around the house, hike in the mountains, sit on the back patio with a beverage of choice, or shoot the back nine. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld said it like this, “A recent study showed that more people are afraid of public speaking than are afraid of dying. That means that at a funeral, the average American would rather be in the coffin than giving the eulogy.”
Naaman is a mighty warrior. He has won many battles and gained glory in the name of the King of Aram. Of course he doesn’t get to share the spoils with anybody because he has leprosy. A tiny slave girl laments over the fate of her master. She tells her mistress, “If only my master would see the prophet who is in Samaria! He would cure him of his leprosy.” If you think your health plan has hoops, here’s a slave girl referring her master to a Jewish Prophet in exile in Samaria through her mistress. So the King of Aram signs off on this and sends Naaman off to the King of Israel with a signed letter and a gift of silver and gold worth about $680,000 by today’s standards.
Unfortunately, when the King of Israel got the letter it said “so you may cure him.” His first response was You want me to do what? “Am I God? Can I cure disease?” He rented his garments, a fancy way to say he dramatically tore his clothes in woe, grief, sorrow, and in this case he wondering if the King of Aram was raring for a fight sending his mightiest General. Elisha caught wind of this and sent the king a note saying send him to me. The king was more than happy to pass the buck. He sent Naaman to see the prophet in Samaria.
Let me set the scene for you. Naaman isn’t travelling alone or with a small cadre of officers. The man is traveling with a small army including the slaves who serve them. He’s got an entourage that would make a Hollywood diva positively jealous. Elisha’s house isn’t a ranch style three bedroom with attached garage a couple blocks from good schools either. It would be more like a Mexican Villa. There would be a main house with a walled courtyard surrounding the larger compound. This is where Naaman knocked and the servant met him.
Now imagine this, you’re a servant, probably the chief steward to Elisha, the prophet of the Lord, you have received Naaman at the gate and seen the army of the King of Aram. You have received the formal request that Elisha heal the General of his leprosy. So Elisha’s in the 9th Century BC equivalent of his man cave and he tells you to tell the General, in front of that army, to go take a bath in a dirty river.
Imagine being that guy, now say it with me, “You want me to do what?” You get to meet an army and tell its General to get naked and take a bath in front of the very people he has defeated in battle. If you’re imagining sudden death, I suspect you’ve put yourself in his sandals. Naaman couldn’t give Elisha’s servant the satisfaction of hearing it, so he says it to his servant, “He wants me to do what?” Instead he talks about cleaner rivers at home. The servants shrug and say “My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more, then, when he tells you, ‘Wash and be cleansed’!”
Naaman does and his flesh is made anew, baby soft.
Now, did you notice this about the story, the people who move the action along are the people with the least power. When Naaman balks at taking the trip to the Jordan, it is his servants who convince him to go. Before that it’s not Elisha but his servant who delivers the delightful news of the cure. When Naaman arrives at the King of Israel’s throne with an army and the blessing of the King of Aram seeking a cure it’s Elisha who takes this problem off the King’s hands. Finally, and most significantly, it’s a slave girl that gets the ball rolling. Her concern for her master causes her to seek her mistress and tell her where to find a cure. An Israelite slave girl is the ultimate non-person in this place and time. Age, race, and gender all play against her. She is nobody and she sets this chain of events in motion. Over and over I have asked “You want me to do what?” and nobody asked her anything.
After all of this history, and all of this narrative, here comes another question: How many of these servants really wanted to speak up in front of the people with such power? You already have my opinion about the King of Israel sending Naaman to Elisha, he was glad to have him out of the throne room. And the servant of Elisha, going to meet an army alone to tell the General to take a bath. I’m guessing he feared for his life.
What about Naaman’s servants and the little girl? Did they want to speak up? The Naaman’s servants knew giving such bold advice alone could get them killed, and if it didn’t work, it would get their dead bodies stomped to dust. As for the little girl, she wanted the General who conquered her people cured. Now that’s something. She had the least, and she had the purest motive and without her there would be no story of the healing power of the Lord through the authority of the prophet Elisha. People want others to do what is right in their eyes and the eyes of their peers for their own gain. The little girl gained nothing.
Paul warns the Galatians that powerful people want them to be circumcised not for their benefit, but for the benefit of the people in charge of the Synagogue. He writes, “The only reason they do this, is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ.” Before Paul became a force in Christianity, the gentiles who wanted to accept Jesus were required to first become Jews. It was logical at the time, Jesus was a Jew, the followers of Jesus were Jews, so to be a new follower of Jesus was to first be a Jew.
It was all to keep the law, but “not even those who are circumcised keep the law,” reminded Paul, “yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your circumcision in the flesh.” The truth was the ritual wasn’t so much for the glory of God or Christ, it was for the leaders who wanted the gentiles circumcised. Paul, who was one of those leaders before his conversion, refused to accept those accolades anymore. He cried out, “May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.” He would die for none but his Lord Jesus the Christ. What others wanted, Paul knew was worthless, submission to the cross is all that mattered, and he made sure the Galatians knew.
This power through submission theme continues in our gospel reading. Jesus sent the seventy-two to offer his peace upon a household, and if his peace remains to stay. Then “Heal the sick who are there and tell them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’” Of course when they return they tell another story.
When they returned they had fish tales to tell, one pair landing bigger fish than the last. “Lord,” they said, “even the demons submit to us in your name.”
Jesus said, “I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. I have given you authority to trample on snakes and scorpions and to overcome all the power of the enemy; nothing will harm you.” Jesus says,
“Yeah, you have this power. This is good, but this is not why I sent you out.” He sent them out to share the good news. To heal the sick. To bring in the harvest. Demons and snakes and scorpions were tools to do the work, not the work itself.
Jesus told them, “Do not rejoice that the spirits submit to you, but rejoice that your names are written in heaven.” The flashy part isn’t the important part. Relationships, that’s what’s important. A relationship with the heavenly Father, that’s what’s important.
In this world, we will be asked to do a lot of things and our first impulse is to answer, “You want me to do WHAT!” We see it in our reading from Kings. Our reading from Galatians offers it up in a form, but Paul has told us that form is no longer required. In Luke, Jesus has paired up 72 disciples and sent them out, but it seems they became more enamored by the frosting than the cake. Here’s what I want you to do.
I want you to remember a time in your life when faith changed your life. Was it a mended relationship, or forgiveness, or healing, or a turning point. Think about it. Really think about it. Then, can you find a way to share that story in a couple of minutes? In evangelism (WAIT, YOU WANT ME TO DO WHAT! It’ll be alright, hold on!) these are called “elevator talks.” Share what you want to share in just a couple of minutes, the length of time it takes to go up a couple of floors on an elevator. People don’t want to know theologies, they want to know what kind of difference Jesus, what kind of difference this body of Christ has made in your life.
That’s what I want you to do. Be just like that little girl in 2Kings. She knew there was a prophet, she knew there was healing to be had, and she shared. Now I’m not saying “tell the world” tomorrow. Share the story with your spouse, or someone from the congregation. Share it with me or Marie, we love good stories, and we’ll share our stories with you. This way together we take the first step to share the good news of the kingdom of God with the world… one person at a time.
Showing posts with label 2Kings 5. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2Kings 5. Show all posts
Sunday, July 03, 2016
Sunday, February 12, 2012
Echoes Only Dogs Can Hear
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Marshall, Texas on Sunday February 12, 2012, the 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
Audio for "Echoes Only Dogs Can Hear" (MP3)
Audio for "Echoes Only Dogs Can Hear" (MP3)
2 Kings 5:1-14
Psalm 30
1 Corinthians 9:24-27
Mark 1:40-45
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
In Chaos Theory, there is a concept called “the Butterfly Effect.” The general idea is that minor changes in circumstances can cause a large change in outcome. One of the most common expressions for this is that a butterfly in China can cause a Kansas
We often think of events taking place in direct ways. We often think of the powerful flexing their muscle to get things done in this life. It sure looks that way, especially in an election year when political ads tell us one person changes everything. Some scholars call this a “Great Man” view of history.
Our readings today seem to have great actions taken by great men. I believe we have some great men being swept up in thunderstorms that were born on a butterfly’s wing.
Our reading from 2Kings is one of my personal favorites. What makes this passage so extraordinary to me is that the movers and shakers in this passage aren’t the people you would ordinarily expect to be pushing forward the narrative.
There are some heavy hitters in this passage. One of the biggest names in the social and political realm doesn’t have a proper name; he’s simply referred to as the King of Aram. The commander of his army was a man named Naaman. He was a valiant soldier, a mighty warrior, and the Lord had given victory to Aram through him. We even have mention of Naaman’s wife. As a woman in this ancient world she wouldn’t have had the power and authority of her husband and her king, but in her household she had more than enough power and authority.
As for the Israelites, as we have the unnamed King of Aram we also are introduced to the unnamed King of Israel. As with the King of Aram, the King of Israel is the chief mover and shaker of the nation. Then our reading has a name we are all familiar with from our bible studies, the chief protégé of the great prophet Elijah, Elisha.
Looking at the butterfly effect illustration, these folks are the thunderstorms, and these thunderstorms can produce heavy rains, large hail, damaging winds, and possible tornadoes. These names are big names and powerful people. But as these people are the storms, I find the butterflies far more interesting.
Let’s start at the beginning again, something I did not mention is that Naaman had leprosy. Evidently this ailment wasn’t as big a distraction for the King of Aram as it was for the temple leaders in Jerusalem. While at war, the armies of Aram brought home a young girl from Israel who serves Naaman’s wife. This young girl is the one who suggests her master Naaman see the prophet in Samaria to be rid of his leprosy.
Now that’s some gall. Scripture doesn’t say anyone asked the opinion of this young slave girl. Her people were conquered, that’s how she became a slave, and she’s offering advice to her mistress about matters of state and public health. It’s just not done. This could have been an easy way to write her own death sentence, and she did it. This is our first butterfly flitting its wings on the other side of the world.
Naaman goes to see the King of Israel. Now, no great king’s great general would get an audience with a neighboring king empty handed. Naaman leaves Aram with the blessings of his king, a letter of introduction, six talents of silver, six thousand shekels of gold and ten sets of clothing. The old expression “beware Greeks bearing gifts” is appropriate here. This expression is a reference to the Trojan horse; but in this case a foreign general comes to town having all of the same implications without any of the covert operations.
The King of Israel reads the King of Aram’s letter and sees the general with his entourage, so the first thing that crosses his mind is to cry “Why does this fellow send someone to me to be cured of leprosy? See how he is trying to pick a quarrel with me!” The King of Israel expects the worst, and frankly who can blame him.
So Elisha hears his king has torn his robes in lament expecting Naaman to start taking names any second. Elisha sends a message via courier. Now I say “via courier” because he didn’t have access to either pony express or email. The courier gives him the message, “Have the man come to me and he will know that there is a prophet in Israel.” Here again is nobody special moving the action along. It isn’t the army or the King but a simple servant sending the prophet’s message to the big boys.
Naaman makes his way to the house of Elisha to receive the cure. Elisha sends a messenger to say “Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed.”
Thank God for obedient messengers. If I had received this command from the prophet my first impulse would be to look him in the eye and say, “You want me to do what?” A messenger, a simple messenger is sent to the renowned general of the King of Aram, a general who won great battles and found favor in the Lord. This little guy is sent to the door to meet the general with his personal detachment to tell him to take a bath. No, wait, he is sent to tell him to take seven baths.
Again, it’s the messengers carrying the messages from their masters. The thunderstorms rumble, but it is the butterflies that carry the messages. Their wings carry the words that carry the message.
Naaman is perturbed. The prophet doesn’t come out. The prophet doesn’t invoke the name of the Lord. The prophet doesn’t even pick a nice river. He’s perturbed. But one of Naaman’s servants appeals to the general’s wiser nature. “If he told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it?” If the prophet had told him to perform dramatic acts he would have. Naaman’s servants lead the general to wisdom and to a cure.
There it is, some of the most prominent people in the book of Kings, the movers and shakers who carry out the action; they are the thunderstorms. But if it were not for the servants, slaves, and messengers; the little people, none of this action would have been accomplished. If one of these butterflies had failed to flap its wings the story would not have ended the way it did. If one of the links in the chain of action had been missing then there would have been leprosy and there could have been war.
Often, often people ask themselves if what they can do would make any difference in the whole wide world. You may be familiar with this nursery rhyme:
For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.[1]
If one little piece is missing everything falls apart. We are those pieces.
There’s another song, originally a German folk tune from around 1700 but you may be more familiar with the calypso version sung by Harry Belafonte and Odetta or maybe the Sesame Street version; the song is called “There’s a Hole in My Bucket.”[2]
There’s another song, originally a German folk tune from around 1700 but you may be more familiar with the calypso version sung by Harry Belafonte and Odetta or maybe the Sesame Street version; the song is called “There’s a Hole in My Bucket.”[2]
He says there’s a hole in the bucket. She tells him to fix it. He asks her how and she tells him to use straw. This goes on through more and more verses as she tells him he’ll need water to wet the whetstone to sharpen the axe to cut the straw to patch the bottom of the bucket but he can’t. Why not? He can’t get water because there’s a hole in the bucket. When one thing goes wrong, the whole thing falls apart.
In our gospel reading a man with leprosy comes to Jesus. We are still in that first fateful week after Jesus first teaches in the synagogue; right after Jesus calls his first disciples. This meeting takes place not long after Jesus tells the gang that no matter how many people are coming up to Simon and Andrew’s ancestral home, there are others who need him too. They need to go so they can share the Good News with all the people. That is why he came.
So not long after they leave, along the road, they are met by a man with leprosy. “If you are willing, you can make me clean.” Jesus tells the man he is willing and he is cleansed.
After the cleansing, Jesus sends the man away at once with a strong warning, “See that you don’t tell this to anyone. But go, show yourself to the priest and offer the sacrifices that Moses commanded for your cleansing as a testimony to them.” The storm is rising and people who can portend the signs are already beginning to see this storm in Jesus of Nazareth, the man who is God who exorcises spirits and heals diseases. But this time the butterfly throws a monkey wrench into life its ownself.
He doesn’t go to the temple to show himself to the priest and make the sacrifices Moses prescribed. As Jesus said—appearance at the temple, cleansed, with the appropriate offerings would provide testimony to them—the temple priests—that something was happening in the hinterlands of Judea. Instead, the man goes out and began talking freely, spreading the good news. He makes it so Jesus can’t enter a town openly. He is forced to stay in the wilderness, the desert, what the New International Version calls “lonely places.”
How’s that for one little hitch causing things to go awry?
So here is one of the great “what if” questions of scripture. What if the man had presented himself to the temple priests? John’s gospel gives us an indication on this one. John 9 gives us the story of the man who was blind from birth. Jesus heals the man with a spittle mud pack. When he is taken to the temple by the Pharisees the temple elite are not happy to see him or his opened eyes. In one of the great misunderstandings of scripture, the man asks if the temple folks want to be Christ’s disciples too. With that he is insulted and thrown out.
Looking at our gospel reading and this story from John 9, it may not be a great leap to say that if he had presented himself at the temple, even with the sacrifices Moses commanded, it would have caused a scandal the likes of which the temple was not ready to face. As Jesus said, this was a word to the temple; that healing and cleansing—acts of God—were happening in the wilderness. Instead, the man who used to have leprosy spreads the Good News of God making it impossible for Jesus to leave the countryside.
Little guys can make a big difference. As for the difference it meant to Jesus’ mission on earth; while it changed the trajectory of the spread of the gospel, in the end it meant nothing. We know that Christ’s mission ended the only way it could, on the cross and in the resurrection. In this case, the butterfly wings caused a diversion, but it could never sidetrack our Lord from his goal, the reconciliation of God and humanity.
So there it is, when we feel weak, when we feel that there is nothing we can do, we can. When we feel there is no place for us in the work of God there is. We don’t have to be the Moderator of the General Assembly or the head of something, when we answer our call our butterflies fly and great thunderstorms are moved.
But there is always the question, “What if I stumble, what if I fail?”
Here’s the difference between these two stories: As we read in 2Kings, we can help change the lives of those around us. As we see in Mark, nothing we can do will change God. As the leper did, we may cause a hitch in the git-a-long of the Lord, but we cannot halt the kingdom. This should be reassuring. If we fear what we do can hinder God, we cannot. Like the leper in our reading, we cannot change God’s reconciling work.
There’s a butterfly in China and a Kansas thunderstorm. There are actions and reactions that cause things to happen half-way around the world. Sometimes it’s as dynamic as we read in Kings. More often than not they’re echoes only dogs can hear; and here’s the good news, God hears those echoes. God hears the echoes and by his sacrifice we are restored. Thanks be to God.
[1] This version found at http://www.rhymes.org.uk/for_want_of_a_nail.htm, retrieved February 10, 2012.
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There's_a_Hole_in_My_Bucket, retrieved February 10, 2012.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Wishing, Willing, Choosing
This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday February 15, 2009, the 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time.
2 Kings 5:1-14
Psalm 30
1 Corinthians 9:24-27
Mark 1:40-45
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
The Adventures of Pinocchio was written by Carlo Collodi and published in 1883. I think it is safe to say that we all know at least a little about the mischievous adventures of this animated marionette and his poor father, the woodcarver Geppetto.
The 1940 Disney version involves the wooden puppet being brought to life by a blue fairy, who tells him he can become a real boy if he proves himself “brave, truthful, and unselfish.” Thus begins Pinocchio’s adventures to become a real boy involving many encounters with a host of unsavory characters.
While in Collodi’s original story, the talking cricket is accidently killed by Pinocchio, in the film he fares better. In the Disney version he is translated into a comical and wise partner who accompanies Pinocchio on his adventures, having been appointed by the Blue Fairy to serve as the official conscience for Pinocchio.[1]
And of course, we are all familiar with Jiminy Cricket’s signature song, “When You Wish upon a Star.”
When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires
Will come to you
If your heart is in your dream
No request is too extreme
When you wish upon a star
As dreamers do
The reason I mention this is that as I have said before, all translation is interpretation, and this passage has one of the best examples.
Our reading this morning from the New Revised Standard Version began: “A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, ‘If you choose, you can make me clean.’ Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, ‘I do choose. Be made clean!’”
The New International Version’s rendition of this verse is different. Instead of saying “If you choose” and “I do choose,” it says “If you are willing” and “I am willing.” So, what’s the difference? What’s at stake?
The English teacher would say that one of these verbs is active and the other is passive. This is what the teacher calls “grammatical voice.” An easy way to tell the difference is that in the active voice, action happens. Sending, doing, even seeing and smelling are in the active voice. The passive voice means that action is being done to something. In fact, in the passive voice the verb is prefaced by a form of “to be.” So passive voice examples are being sent, been done, being seen and were smelled. The active voice is preferred in speech and creative writing because it denotes action. Action moves stories along. Something happens; which is far better than when something is happening.
To show how important the differences between active and passive voice is in writing, when Microsoft Word runs its “readability statistics,” one of the statistics is the percentage of passive sentences, and the fewer the better.
So for the English teacher in all of us, the answer to the question “what’s at stake?” is that the man with leprosy and Jesus are both better doing than being. It is better “to choose” than “to be willing.”
Another difference between these two interpretations is that, frankly for my money, “to be willing” seems more wishy-washy than “to choose.” I don’t know if there is a difference in reality, but willingness is one thing, and it doesn’t necessarily lead to action. To choose is to do something. Of course, in a way, this is just another look at the active/passive discussion without using technical jargon like “grammatical voice.”
We’ve been together for three-and-a-half years, so by now I am sure that you who know me best anticipate a discussion on the Greek word used in this gospel. This is where we enter even more interesting vocabulary territory. You see, the word used here is not often rendered as either “is willing” or “choosing.” Usually it is translated as to have a desire for something; to wish, to want, to desire.
We have suddenly opened a brand new can of worms with this. Yes, the Greek word used here can mean to have a desire for something, to wish, to want; and to choose or to be willing.
One of my professors from Austin who was something of a “boy wonder” could not wait to get to seminary so that he could learn the scriptures in their original languages. He figured that this way he would be able to have all of his textual questions answered. He was surprised to discover that when studying scripture in their original languages he actually developed more questions than he had answered.
That’s frustrating if you let it be, but if you let the questions open you further to the mystery and the glory of God good things begin to happen.
The committees that translate the scriptures and publish bibles have to make decisions about the words they put in print. They have to choose specific words to use and not to use. Every word in our bibles can’t have two or three different choices of definitions and interpretations. If it did, then one bible as we know it would be the size of an Encyclopedia Britannica so decisions have to be made. In this case, the editors of the New International Version chose to go with “are willing” and the editors of the New Revised Standard selected “to choose.” Neither picked wish or desire.
Here’s the good news, the choices that the editorial committees have to make do not have to be made by you and me. We have the power, we have the authority to seek the Holy Spirit and make a choice of how we want to interpret this. We can pick one, or the other, or another still, but there’s one more choice we can make. We can choose all of the above.
What if we choose to allow all of the nuances of this Greek word to flow into our translation, our interpretation of this passage? What would happen if we did use all three translation choices; wishing, willing, and choosing? What would happen is that we would get a fuller idea of the richness of what the man with leprosy asked and what Jesus did, a fullness that no single translation can give us.
Jesus wants to cleanse us—and Jesus wants us to be cleansed. The Lord has a desire for a loving relationship with each and every one of us, with all humanity, with all creation. God’s wish, God’s desire is the restoration of all creation. When the leper says “you can cleanse me if you wish” he is absolutely correct. Jesus answers with “I wish, be cleansed.” Translating the passage this way points out the greatest wish, the greatest desire of the Lord; it is a good translation.
Jesus is willing to heal us. I believe willingness is similar to desire, with one additional element, power. Jesus not only wants to cleanse us, but he has the power to cleanse us and is willing to use that power to restore our relationship with the Almighty. The man with leprosy knew Jesus had the power, he knew Jesus could make him clean if only the Lord was willing. Jesus is able and Jesus is willing to use his power and authority to cleanse us.
Finally, Jesus chooses to cleanse us, heal us, make us whole. With all action there is choice. Not only must there be the want and the power, there should also be conscious choice in the matter. Please note that I did say “should” here. People leave things up to chance all the time, but making the conscious choice to do something, choosing to make a difference, is the hallmark between intent and accident. God intends action.
In our Call to Worship from Psalm 30, David cries to the Lord “you restored me to health, you brought me up from the dead, you restored my life as I was going down to the grave.”
In our gospel reading the Lord Jesus Christ cleansed this unnamed leper because it is what the Lord wished to do, was willing to do, and chose to do. In our Old Testament reading Naaman was cleansed by the Lord God because it is what the Lord wished to do, was willing to do, and chose to do. The Lord seeks every opportunity to make connections, to develop relationships with God’s people.
Notice one more thing; the people God chooses as examples of this relationship are not the perfect people, far from it. It’s not the people without problems that are noticed in scripture, it is people who have flaws.
People with leprosy were considered unclean. To be unclean means being contaminated by a physical, ritual, or moral impurity; the absence of such impurities constitutes cleanness. These concepts have very ancient roots in tribal life, and in advanced religions evolve into a system of ritual laws, administered by the priests. At this stage uncleanness is thought of as what is displeasing to the deities or as what belongs to the sphere of the demonic.[2]
Those who were contaminated by a physical, ritual, or moral impurity were required to separate themselves from the community. When others were within earshot they were required to cry out “unclean” so that the unsuspecting traveler would not be accidently made unclean as well. The unclean were separated from their families, friends, and homes.
The procedures to bring about ritual cleansing involve a waiting period of one, seven, or more days; ritual employing water, fire, or some other cleansing agent; and often a sacrifice of the nature of a sin offering.[3]
At the risk of becoming a social leper himself, Jesus reaches out to the man. Jesus restores him to his family, friends, and home. In our readings today, the cleansing power of Christ, the healing power of God put an end to the need for ritual purification. In Christ we are restored not only to health, but to our people, ourselves, and our Lord.
When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires
Will come to you
If your heart is in your dream
No request is too extreme
When you wish upon a star
As dreamers do
It is little known that there are actually two endings to Pinocchio. The original ending of the story is what today we call the end of the first act. The talking cricket is still dead, the blue fairy is not yet in the story, and Pinocchio himself is not redeemed, he does not become a real boy. This ending is no children’s story. It is a frightening tale bordering on horrific.
But the second act was created. In the end, all is restored and made well in the world. The marionette becomes flesh and bone, the cricket lives, and Geppetto, who was quite ill, is healed. The request for all to be restored, no matter how absurd, how extreme it may be, is granted.
Through Christ, we are cleansed. We are restored to right relationship with the Lord. In the Call to Worship we prayed, “I cried out to you and you restored me to health.” This because God wished, was willing, and chose to make it so.
When joy comes in the morning, we too must wish, be willing, and choose to join the Lord in the work of restoration. Is it scary? Sure it is. Imagine being Elisha’s messenger at the door telling a war ready General Naaman to take a bath. But let us do just that. Let us join the Lord Jesus in his restoring work.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiminy_Cricket
[2] “Clean and Unclean,” Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible
[3] Ibid.
2 Kings 5:1-14
Psalm 30
1 Corinthians 9:24-27
Mark 1:40-45
May the words of my mouth and the meditations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen
The Adventures of Pinocchio was written by Carlo Collodi and published in 1883. I think it is safe to say that we all know at least a little about the mischievous adventures of this animated marionette and his poor father, the woodcarver Geppetto.
The 1940 Disney version involves the wooden puppet being brought to life by a blue fairy, who tells him he can become a real boy if he proves himself “brave, truthful, and unselfish.” Thus begins Pinocchio’s adventures to become a real boy involving many encounters with a host of unsavory characters.
While in Collodi’s original story, the talking cricket is accidently killed by Pinocchio, in the film he fares better. In the Disney version he is translated into a comical and wise partner who accompanies Pinocchio on his adventures, having been appointed by the Blue Fairy to serve as the official conscience for Pinocchio.[1]
And of course, we are all familiar with Jiminy Cricket’s signature song, “When You Wish upon a Star.”
When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires
Will come to you
If your heart is in your dream
No request is too extreme
When you wish upon a star
As dreamers do
The reason I mention this is that as I have said before, all translation is interpretation, and this passage has one of the best examples.
Our reading this morning from the New Revised Standard Version began: “A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, ‘If you choose, you can make me clean.’ Moved with pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, ‘I do choose. Be made clean!’”
The New International Version’s rendition of this verse is different. Instead of saying “If you choose” and “I do choose,” it says “If you are willing” and “I am willing.” So, what’s the difference? What’s at stake?
The English teacher would say that one of these verbs is active and the other is passive. This is what the teacher calls “grammatical voice.” An easy way to tell the difference is that in the active voice, action happens. Sending, doing, even seeing and smelling are in the active voice. The passive voice means that action is being done to something. In fact, in the passive voice the verb is prefaced by a form of “to be.” So passive voice examples are being sent, been done, being seen and were smelled. The active voice is preferred in speech and creative writing because it denotes action. Action moves stories along. Something happens; which is far better than when something is happening.
To show how important the differences between active and passive voice is in writing, when Microsoft Word runs its “readability statistics,” one of the statistics is the percentage of passive sentences, and the fewer the better.
So for the English teacher in all of us, the answer to the question “what’s at stake?” is that the man with leprosy and Jesus are both better doing than being. It is better “to choose” than “to be willing.”
Another difference between these two interpretations is that, frankly for my money, “to be willing” seems more wishy-washy than “to choose.” I don’t know if there is a difference in reality, but willingness is one thing, and it doesn’t necessarily lead to action. To choose is to do something. Of course, in a way, this is just another look at the active/passive discussion without using technical jargon like “grammatical voice.”
We’ve been together for three-and-a-half years, so by now I am sure that you who know me best anticipate a discussion on the Greek word used in this gospel. This is where we enter even more interesting vocabulary territory. You see, the word used here is not often rendered as either “is willing” or “choosing.” Usually it is translated as to have a desire for something; to wish, to want, to desire.
We have suddenly opened a brand new can of worms with this. Yes, the Greek word used here can mean to have a desire for something, to wish, to want; and to choose or to be willing.
One of my professors from Austin who was something of a “boy wonder” could not wait to get to seminary so that he could learn the scriptures in their original languages. He figured that this way he would be able to have all of his textual questions answered. He was surprised to discover that when studying scripture in their original languages he actually developed more questions than he had answered.
That’s frustrating if you let it be, but if you let the questions open you further to the mystery and the glory of God good things begin to happen.
The committees that translate the scriptures and publish bibles have to make decisions about the words they put in print. They have to choose specific words to use and not to use. Every word in our bibles can’t have two or three different choices of definitions and interpretations. If it did, then one bible as we know it would be the size of an Encyclopedia Britannica so decisions have to be made. In this case, the editors of the New International Version chose to go with “are willing” and the editors of the New Revised Standard selected “to choose.” Neither picked wish or desire.
Here’s the good news, the choices that the editorial committees have to make do not have to be made by you and me. We have the power, we have the authority to seek the Holy Spirit and make a choice of how we want to interpret this. We can pick one, or the other, or another still, but there’s one more choice we can make. We can choose all of the above.
What if we choose to allow all of the nuances of this Greek word to flow into our translation, our interpretation of this passage? What would happen if we did use all three translation choices; wishing, willing, and choosing? What would happen is that we would get a fuller idea of the richness of what the man with leprosy asked and what Jesus did, a fullness that no single translation can give us.
Jesus wants to cleanse us—and Jesus wants us to be cleansed. The Lord has a desire for a loving relationship with each and every one of us, with all humanity, with all creation. God’s wish, God’s desire is the restoration of all creation. When the leper says “you can cleanse me if you wish” he is absolutely correct. Jesus answers with “I wish, be cleansed.” Translating the passage this way points out the greatest wish, the greatest desire of the Lord; it is a good translation.
Jesus is willing to heal us. I believe willingness is similar to desire, with one additional element, power. Jesus not only wants to cleanse us, but he has the power to cleanse us and is willing to use that power to restore our relationship with the Almighty. The man with leprosy knew Jesus had the power, he knew Jesus could make him clean if only the Lord was willing. Jesus is able and Jesus is willing to use his power and authority to cleanse us.
Finally, Jesus chooses to cleanse us, heal us, make us whole. With all action there is choice. Not only must there be the want and the power, there should also be conscious choice in the matter. Please note that I did say “should” here. People leave things up to chance all the time, but making the conscious choice to do something, choosing to make a difference, is the hallmark between intent and accident. God intends action.
In our Call to Worship from Psalm 30, David cries to the Lord “you restored me to health, you brought me up from the dead, you restored my life as I was going down to the grave.”
In our gospel reading the Lord Jesus Christ cleansed this unnamed leper because it is what the Lord wished to do, was willing to do, and chose to do. In our Old Testament reading Naaman was cleansed by the Lord God because it is what the Lord wished to do, was willing to do, and chose to do. The Lord seeks every opportunity to make connections, to develop relationships with God’s people.
Notice one more thing; the people God chooses as examples of this relationship are not the perfect people, far from it. It’s not the people without problems that are noticed in scripture, it is people who have flaws.
People with leprosy were considered unclean. To be unclean means being contaminated by a physical, ritual, or moral impurity; the absence of such impurities constitutes cleanness. These concepts have very ancient roots in tribal life, and in advanced religions evolve into a system of ritual laws, administered by the priests. At this stage uncleanness is thought of as what is displeasing to the deities or as what belongs to the sphere of the demonic.[2]
Those who were contaminated by a physical, ritual, or moral impurity were required to separate themselves from the community. When others were within earshot they were required to cry out “unclean” so that the unsuspecting traveler would not be accidently made unclean as well. The unclean were separated from their families, friends, and homes.
The procedures to bring about ritual cleansing involve a waiting period of one, seven, or more days; ritual employing water, fire, or some other cleansing agent; and often a sacrifice of the nature of a sin offering.[3]
At the risk of becoming a social leper himself, Jesus reaches out to the man. Jesus restores him to his family, friends, and home. In our readings today, the cleansing power of Christ, the healing power of God put an end to the need for ritual purification. In Christ we are restored not only to health, but to our people, ourselves, and our Lord.
When you wish upon a star
Makes no difference who you are
Anything your heart desires
Will come to you
If your heart is in your dream
No request is too extreme
When you wish upon a star
As dreamers do
It is little known that there are actually two endings to Pinocchio. The original ending of the story is what today we call the end of the first act. The talking cricket is still dead, the blue fairy is not yet in the story, and Pinocchio himself is not redeemed, he does not become a real boy. This ending is no children’s story. It is a frightening tale bordering on horrific.
But the second act was created. In the end, all is restored and made well in the world. The marionette becomes flesh and bone, the cricket lives, and Geppetto, who was quite ill, is healed. The request for all to be restored, no matter how absurd, how extreme it may be, is granted.
Through Christ, we are cleansed. We are restored to right relationship with the Lord. In the Call to Worship we prayed, “I cried out to you and you restored me to health.” This because God wished, was willing, and chose to make it so.
When joy comes in the morning, we too must wish, be willing, and choose to join the Lord in the work of restoration. Is it scary? Sure it is. Imagine being Elisha’s messenger at the door telling a war ready General Naaman to take a bath. But let us do just that. Let us join the Lord Jesus in his restoring work.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiminy_Cricket
[2] “Clean and Unclean,” Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible
[3] Ibid.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)