On this day in 1952, the United States won a gold medal in Olympic 8-man crowing. The crew was comprised of midshipmen from the US Naval Academy, a crew known as the “Great Eight.” If you are interested in more information and a link to a Gregory Peck narrated video, see more here.
This coming Sunday is the 17th Sunday in Lectionary Cycle C. In yesterday’s post we considered the communal nature of the Lord’s Prayer and explored some linguistic elements. We will continue that trajectory a bit more today as we continue to look at the Matthean and Lukan presentations of this universal prayer.
Comparison of the two forms of the Lord’s Prayer reveals that the structure and content are basically the same, reflecting the original instruction of Jesus. They were shaped by different community traditions at a very early stage. Matthew’s text, an adaptation for liturgical use, has been used in worship down to our day; the briefer text of Luke, though less familiar, is probably closer to the original phrasing of Jesus. Both begin with Jesus’ distinctive address for God, “Father” (Hebrew: abbā – see note below on v.2), and pray first for the glorification of God’s name on earth and the full establishment of his kingdom. Then they turn to the disciples’ needs: God’s continual protection day by day and his sustaining support in the face of the “final test” at the end of time. In slightly different wording, both formulas relate God’s forgiveness of us to our forgiveness of others.
Continue readingThis coming Sunday is the 17th Sunday in Lectionary Cycle C. In yesterday’s post we looked at the immediate and broader context for the Lukan teaching about prayer – in this passage most widely noted as “the Lord’s Prayer.”
The context for the Lord’s Prayer in Luke and Matthew (6:5-15) are quite different. Matthew is writing for Jewish Christians that share a common heritage of prayer. Thus Jesus simply begins: “But when you pray…” They seem to know how to pray and the importance of prayer, but they need further clarification about prayer – especially vis-à-vis the temple and synagogue exemplar and the pagans. In Luke, the audience, (including the disciples,) don’t know how to pray (at least as Jesus’ followers). The disciples (and Luke’s readers?) ask Jesus to teach them to pray – and this seems to be in distinction from John the Baptist’s disciples (v.1). This introduction also suggests that we are defined by our prayers.
Continue readingIn the readings from last week and today’s first reading, we are reminded of how obstinate and hard of heart was Pharaoh. In these confrontations between Moses and Pharaoh, it is good to keep in mind that it is really a showdown between God and the mere human (Pharaoh) who would make himself to be a god.
Who is Pharaoh? Pharaoh is not one single king in Exodus. If you pay attention, you’ll see that this royal title refers to a sequence of Egyptian kings over many generations. It raises the interesting question of why the author doesn’t actually name the Pharaoh who opposed Moses (was he Thutmose II or III, or Ramses I or II?). This was almost certainly on purpose. The author doesn’t want us to focus on one single king. Rather, he wants us to see Pharaoh as an archetype of the pattern of human rebellion that began in the garden and culminated in Babylon.
This king, or sequence of kings, is the epitome of human evil. He embodies the strange and tragic turn the human heart can take when one person or society places their own values and well-being above another person or society. Pharaoh is what happens when an entire nation redefines good and evil apart from God’s wisdom. You get an Egypt building its wealth and security on the backs of an abused, oppressed, and enslaved Israel. As the story develops, Pharaoh even places his own reputation and pride above the well-being of his own people. This is a horrific situation, and it’s the Bible’s diagnosis of the human condition in corporate terms. The Egyptian empire and its Pharaoh is the Babylon of Genesis on steroids. God has to respond.
Continue readingThis coming Sunday is the 17th Sunday in Lectionary Cycle C. The gospel offers Luke’s version of the “Lord’s Prayer” as well as a parable about how the paternal nature of God to provide the good things that are needed
With the geographical note, “in a certain place” Luke has separated this narrative from the immediate context of Chapter 10 (the conclusion of the mission of the 72, the parable of the Good Samaritan, and the encounter with Martha and Mary). Luke now presents three episodes concerned with prayer:
There is a contrast between our first reading and the gospel. In the first reading (Genesis 18:1–15) Abraham is praised for his generous hospitality to the three visitors who are often interpreted as angels or a theophany of God. In the gospel (Luke 10:38–42), Martha is busy serving Jesus but is gently corrected for being “anxious and worried” rather than sitting and listening to the Lord like Mary. It might raise the question: why is Abraham’s activity in service to the guests rewarded while Martha’s service to the guests is gently admonished? Let’s explore that question.
Abraham’s hospitality is framed as a model of ancient Near Eastern virtue. He rushes to provide water, organize bread, meat, and rest — crucial life-saving gestures in a desert setting. That is what Abraham offers. Did the visitors offer anything other than their presence? Yes, in the end they offer the divine promise of a son in response to that hospitality. The reading underscores the virtue of hospitality as a means to encounter God – and in the encounter to enter more deeply into the covenant promises and so step on the path to completeness.
Continue readingThis coming Sunday is the 16th Sunday of Ordinary Time and the story of Martha and Mary. In yesterday’s post we considered the gospel text and offered some thoughts about it as regards “place” in our culture. Today we offer a final reflection on this passage.
Part of Culpepper’s (Luke, New Interpreter’s Bible, 232) final “Reflections:”
In its own way, the conjunction of the stories about the good Samaritan and the female disciple voices Jesus’ protest against the rules and boundaries set by the culture in which he lived. As they develop seeing and hearing as metaphors for the activity of the kingdom, the twin stories also expose the injustice of social barriers that categorize, restrict, and oppress various groups in any society (Samaritans, victims, women). To love God with all one’s heart and one’s neighbor as oneself meant then and now that one must often reject society’s rules in favor of the codes of the kingdom — a society without distinctions and boundaries between its members. The rules of that society are just two — to love God and one’s neighbor — but these rules are so radically different from those of the society in which we live that living by them invariably calls us to disregard all else, break the rules, and follow Jesus’ example.
To judge from the story of the Samaritan, Martha should have been praised for her practical service to Jesus. Her action, in fact, is neither praised nor condemned, but she is challenged to consider her priorities. The whole gospel is not contained in loving service to others, no matter how important that is. Christian discipleship is first and foremost personal adherence to Jesus. There must be time to listen to his “word;” devotion to Jesus is the one thing required. This relationship shows itself in loving service, but without prayer, care for others’ needs may not be love.
Image credit: Jesus at the home of Martha and Mary | Diego Velázquez, 1618 | National Gallery, London| PD-US
This coming Sunday is the 16th Sunday of Ordinary Time and the story of Martha and Mary. In yesterday’s post we considered the gospel text and offered some thoughts about it. Today we consider the proper role and place of discipleship and service.
There are some things that are culturally amiss here. First of all, Mary is not in her “proper place” according to the culture. In the gender-based division of space in that culture, it is very likely Mary who is sitting with Jesus in an area reserved for men (whether dining area or “living room” area). Second, it is not clear who is the elder sister here. Since Jesus interacts with Mary here and in John 11, perhaps Martha might have been the younger sister. But since Martha extended the hospitality into “her” (?) home, she is the elder sister.
In the Mediterranean cultural perspective on human activity men are expected to be spontaneous, to react to the challenge, opportunity, or invitation of the moment (see Luke 7:31-35). Women are expected to work, achieve, to be involved in purposeful activity. Mary is spontaneously engaging Jesus when she should be involved in purposeful activity. This can be seen when men are healed in Luke’s gospel, they respond spontaneously and run out to spread the word. When Simon’s mother-in-law is healed, her first response is the measured activity of serving a meal.
Continue readingThis coming Sunday is the 16th Sunday of Ordinary Time and the story of Martha and Mary. In yesterday’s post we took a deep dive into the biblical meaning and implications of hospitality. Today we will move from the welcome of hospitality to the scene most remembered:
“She [Martha] had a sister named Mary (who) sat beside the Lord at his feet listening to him speak. Mary was listening to Jesus’ word or message (logos in the singular) when “Martha, burdened with much serving, came to him and said, “Lord, do you not care that my sister has left me by myself to do the serving? Tell her to help me.”
Culpepper simply states: “Martha presumes to tell Jesus what he should do; Mary lets Jesus tell her what she should do.” Is that a bad thing? As we shall see next week (Luke 11:1-13), Jesus is clear about the importance of persistence in prayer, e.g., the friend at midnight (11:5-8), the widow before the judge (18:1-8). Telling God repeatedly what we want God to do is not necessarily bad! However, Martha’s words, like the Pharisee’s prayer in Luke 18:9-14, indicate flaws in their motivations.
Continue readingThis coming Sunday is the 16th Sunday of Ordinary Time and the story of Martha and Mary. In yesterday’s post we provided some points of contact showing how this story and last week’s gospel (the lawyer who wanted to know what he must do to gain eternal life), together portray a fuller picture of what it means to be a disciple of Christ. Today’s post is a long one – delving into the biblical meaning of hospitality
Hospitality in the Greek is philoxenia. The practice of receiving a guest or stranger graciously was common to all cultures in the period of both the Old and New Testament. The word most often associated with hospitality in the LXX and the NT is xenos, which literally means foreigner, stranger, or even enemy. In its derived sense, however, the term comes to denote both guest and host alike. Typically, the verb used to describe the extending of hospitality is xenizein (Sir 29:25; 1 Macc 9:6; Acts 10:23; Heb 13:2). In the NT one who receives visitors is said to be philoxenos, i.e., a “lover of strangers,” or to be practicing the virtue of philoxenia (1 Tim 3:2; 1 Pet 4:9; Rom 12:13; Heb 13:2).
Continue reading
friarmusings 