The following material was written by the Rev. John Shearman (jlss@sympatico.ca) of the United Church of Canada. John normally structures his offerings so that the first portion can be used as a bulletin insert, while the second portion provides a more in depth 'introduction to the scripture'.
INTRODUCTION TO THE SCRIPTURE
Ordinary 20 - Proper 15 - Year A
[NOTE: Throughout the Season after Pentecost the RCL
provides a set of alternate lessons which some
denominations prefer. A summary of these readings is
also included below.]
GENESIS 45:1-15 This incident in the long story of Joseph in
Egypt follows the classic model of dramatic storytelling a tale of
reversal and recognition exhibited by all ancient Middle Eastern mythology
and legend as a means of communicating living truth. The passage,
entitled in the NRSV as “The Truth Revealed,” came from two different
versions from the 9th and 8th centuries BCE respectively. So vss. 7 and 8a
appear to be repetitious, but in fact came from two original documents.
Although there is relatively little mention of God throughout the Joseph
cycle, both versions express the same theology of history that God is Lord
of history as does the pathos of this incident of Joseph revealing himself
to his brothers.
PSALM 133 Two beautiful metaphors brilliantly illustrate
this brief psalm. It is one of fifteen in a collection known as “Songs of
Ascent” (Pss. 120-134) incorporated into the Psalter. These hymns of
praise may have been sung by pilgrims or the companies of Levites assigned
to a regular period of service in the temple as they approached the temple
courts. The theme of this little gem is not only the solidarity of the
family, but of the whole nation.
ISAIAH 56:1,6-8 [Alternate] This hymn celebrates the spirit of
universalism, one of the main themes of Israel’s unknown prophet of the
Babylonian Exile whose works form Isaiah 40-55. Not only Israel but
people of all nations will be welcome to worship in God’s rebuilt temple
in Jerusalem.
PSALM 67 [Alternate] This short psalm also celebrates the
hope that all peoples will worship Israel’s God and receive God’s full
blessing.
ROMANS 11:1-2a,29-32 Countering the fear of many of his contemporary
Jews, Paul sought to remind them that God had not rejected them by
bringing Gentiles into the developing tradition that Jesus Christ is the
true Messiah. Rather, Jews and Gentiles alike have now received the full
measure of God’s mercy through Christ.
MATTHEW 15:(10-20),21-28 There seems little doubt that Matthew fully
intended to link of the parable and teaching in 15:10-20 with the story of
Jesus healing the daughter of a Canaanite woman in a foreign country as
two expressions of the universal love of God for all peoples. This
important lesson touches us pointedly at a time when we too are all prone
to divide the good from the bad, our race, our country, our tribe, our
folk, our faith from all those others.
A MORE COMPLETE ANALYSIS:
GENESIS 45:1-15 This classic model of dramatic storytelling named by
Aristotle as a tale of reversal and recognition is found in all ancient
Middle Eastern mythology and legend. It communicated living truth - and
still does. This passage, entitled in the NRSV as “The Truth Revealed,”
consists of a conflation of the J and E narratives from the 9th and 8th
centuries BCE respectively. Vss. 7 and 8a appear to be repetitious, but
in fact come from the two separate documents. Both express the theology
of history exhibited in these narratives, although there is relatively
little mention of Yahweh/Elohim throughout the Joseph cycle.
Having lived through the tumultuous 20th century CE, we may find it more
than a little difficult to conceive of God as Lord of history. This was a
fundamental article of faith in Hebrew theology which the Christian church
adopted without question. The eschatology of the four gospels, the
Pauline corpus, the general epistles, and especially Revelation, show how
extensively the apostolic church shared this world view. The story the
ascension in Acts 1:6-11 and the expectation of the imminent return of
Christ in power and glory make this perfectly clear. But it is a matter
of faith in the providence of God and not obvious to and frequently
denounced by those who do not share this conviction.
Note that the way Joseph addressed his brothers (vss. 4-11) almost places
the blame on God for their sin. Such an attitude regards God as an
authoritarian bully, manipulating human lives for God’s own purposes,
albeit to human benefit. Would it not be better to see this as a
redemptive experience rather than to lay blame as where it surely did not
belong?
Nonetheless the joyful reunion of the brothers is heartwarming and told
with all the power of a great climax to the story. The settlement of the
tribe of Jacob in Goshen by direction of Joseph differs from the later
account of Pharaoh’s order to this effect (45:28-47:12). Scholars presume
that vs. 10, therefore, may be a gloss added when the combined narratives
were being edited or copied by later scribes. Such ‘corrections’ were not
considered inappropriate in the ancient process of transmission.
We must not forget that this story is a tribal tradition sacred to the
powerful alliance of the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, the two sons of
Joseph. These were the dominant tribes of the Northern Kingdom of Israel
between the end of Solomon’s reign (circa 922 BCE) to the Assyrian
conquest of Samaria and exile of the northern tribes in 722-721 BCE. It
is not surprising that these stories should exalt their ancestral hero.
During this same period, the J and E documents came into existence. The J
document appears to have originated in the Southern Kingdom of Judah while
the E document came from the Northern Kingdom. Their combination into one
text probably took place in Judah in the 7th century as a means of
preserving the sacred story of the covenant people.
Scholars have long recognized that there may have been an Egyptian model
from which many details of the story were taken. (See commentaries by
such luminaries of the early 20th century as Skinner and Gunkel.) Such
borrowing was common in ancient storytelling. In no way does this
diminish the significance of the Israelite tradition and its greatly
enhanced theological interpretation. Israel’s faith that God intervened
providentially time and again in the history of Israel is a relevant part
of the history of the human race. In the age of pluralism in which we now
live, this faith could become an important element of a developing global
theology inclusive of the history of all faith traditions.
PSALM 133 Two beautiful metaphors illustrate this brief psalm. It is
one of fifteen in a collection known as “Songs of Ascent” (Pss. 120-134)
incorporated into the Psalter. These hymns of praise may have been sung
by pilgrims or the companies of Levites assigned to a regular period of
service in the temple as they approached the temple courts. The theme of
this little gem is not only the solidarity of the family, but of the whole
nation.
On this characteristic of kinship in tribal life, the security of the
nation depended. Particularly during the Hellenistic period (circa 330-
165 BCE), the threat to Hebrew traditions increased greatly as the
economy became commercialized and the whole Middle East came under the
political domination of militaristic and secular overlords, Alexander and
his successors, the Seleucid dynasty. Religious pilgrimages to Jerusalem
became a significant aspect of the culture of the Jewish Diaspora. The
story of boy Jesus and his parents attending the Passover in Jerusalem
exemplified its meaning in Jewish life. (Luke 2:41-52) With the
restoration of Israel’s national statehood in the latter half of the 20th
century and the availability of air transportation, the importance of this
custom has been revived.
The two metaphors come from very different realms of human experience, but
still have much in common. They share the common symbol of pouring, as in
an anointing. Vs. 2 specifically describes an anointing with precious
oil, as Jesus was anointed on two occasions. This practice formed part of
the daily toilet of the rich, usually with scented olive oil or a perfumed
ointment. This had both cooling and analgesic effect as well as covering
unpleasant body odours in the hot climate. It was also widely practiced
on festival occasions. It was customary to anoint the heads of important
guests at feast (cf. Luke 7:46). The coronation of a new king also
included an act of anointing symbolic of the monarch’s role as the servant
of Yahweh. (The Hebrew/Aramaic *mashiah* meant ‘anointed’ and was
translated into Greek as *christos.*)
The other metaphor in vs. 3 recalls two important sources of water: dew
and Mount Hermon. From that mountain in Lebanon flows virtually all the
fresh water in Israel. It is the source of the Jordan from which Israel
still draws most of its water for irrigation and public consumption. One
of the places where dew falls more plentifully on clear, humid nights is
on the slopes of Mount Hermon. This meteorological phenomenon provides
another important source of moisture for the vegetation on these mountain
slopes.
The metaphors refer, of course, to the life-giving blessings of Yahweh
(vs. 4). They vividly portray the pilgrims’ praise on approaching the
sacred temple precincts.
ISAIAH 56:1,6-8 [Alternate] This hymn celebrates a spirit of
universalism, one of the main themes of Israel’s unknown prophet of the
Babylonian Exile whose works form Isaiah 40-55. Not only Israel but
people of all nations will be welcome to worship in God’s rebuilt temple
in Jerusalem.
In many respects, the suggestion that non-Jews would be acceptable in the
courts of the temple was anathema to strict orthodoxy. The Second Temple
built by Zerubbabel among the ruins of Jerusalem after the return form
exile could not have been a very elaborate structure as was Herod’s
reconstruction of it. Although exact archeological and literary evidence
is lacking, it would appear to have had separate courts as did it later
successor. The purpose of the courts was to prevent everyone but male
members of the covenant community from approaching the Holy of Holies. In
this way, the vision of Isaiah 56 was therefore denied. No Gentile could
approach the inner temple closer than the outermost court.
The great travesty of Jewish religious sentiment occurred when in 167 BCE
Antiochus IV surnamed Epiphanes violated the temple, set up an altar to
the Greek god Zeus over the altar of burnt offering and forced Jews to
take part in the festivities on pain of death. The rebellion of
Mattathias and the establishment of the Hasmonean dynasty enabled the
rededication of the temple in what is now celebrated in Judaism as the
Feast of Hanukkah.
The vision of the ancient site of temple as the place for universal
worship of the one true God remains undiminished although not yet
fulfilled. Moslems regard it as equally sacred as the Jews. Over the
centuries since Mohammed is believed to have ascended to heaven from the
site, have built two of their most sacred mosques where Herod’s temple
once stood. Because of its association with Jesus, Christians also regard
it as a holy site and frequently join with Jews in prayer at the West
Wall, the only part of that structure remaining.
PSALM 67 [Alternate] This short psalm also celebrates the hope that all
peoples will worship Israel’s God and receive God’s full blessing.
ROMANS 11:1-2a,29-32 We read this segment of Paul’s diatribe as
Christians; a Jew would read it from a very different point of view. Jews
then did not and now do not believe in Jesus as the Messiah/Christ. Yet
Paul could never have rejected the historical faith of every Israelite
that the Jews were God’s chosen and covenanted people. Rather, he cast
this conviction in the mold of a virtual double predestination (vss. 2a,
28b, 32).
However difficult it may be for us to recognize how a loving God could
condemn everyone so that God’s grace and mercy might be extended to all
through election, that is what Paul seems to be saying in this passage.
This avoids the problem cited in vs. 1 as to whether or not God has
rejected Israel. For Paul, such a rejection would be impossible as long
as there is a remnant of Israel “in Christ” (i.e. accepting the gospel and
thus being part of the *ecclesia*, the church). Thus, those who have been
called and have responded to the gospel in faith have become not only the
remnant of Israel who were God’s elect in ancient times, but the new
Israel God has now created in Christ. Sadly, he relegates those who have
not so responded to the category of “enemies of God” (vs. 28). They are
still the elect, because the gifts of such a calling are irrevocable
(vs.29); but they are disobedient to their call (vs. 30).
Paul’s argument moves on to complete his discussion of the Jews’
disobedience. He separates “the sheep from the goats,” as it were, the
obedient from the disobedient. He concludes that God’s purpose in doing
so was that God’s mercy might be shown to those who are in Christ (vs.
31). Does this not blame God for the disobedience of Israel? Is this what
double predestination really means? God predestined Israel to disobedience
so that he might then elect all those who have now responded to the
gospel?
Nowhere in this passage does Paul use the word *predestination,* although
that may well be what he is implying. Or is he no more than fixing a
place for the Jews in God’s plan of salvation? Remember what has gone
before in this letter: all humanity have sinned; all will be saved by
grace through faith. Despite every advantage the moral law of the
covenant gave them, the Jews had failed in their moral obligations. So
they were now, like everyone else, wholly dependent on the grace of God
for their salvation. As William Barclay has commented: “The whole process
was designed to show that neither Jew nor Gentile could ever be saved
apart from the mercy of God.” (*Daily Bible Study: The Letter to the
Romans*, Edinburgh: St. Andrew Press, 1957, 164.)
However ambiguous this may appear to us, it does clarify Paul’s absolute
conviction that God is in sovereign control over history, past, present
and future. Barclay’s poetic words are noteworthy: “There was nothing
which moved with aimless feet. Not even the most heartbreaking event or
series of events was outside the will and purpose of God. Events can
never run amok. The purposes of God can never be frustrated. It is told
that a child stood at the window on a night when the winds were raging on
the face of the earth, and when the gale was terrifying in its savage
velocity. ‘God,’ she said, ‘must have lost grip on the winds tonight.’ To
Paul, that was precisely what never happened. Things and men, and
processes and nations were never out of control, as he saw it. Everything
was serving the purpose of God. ... He would have insisted that in it,
and through it all, God’s purpose was a purpose of salvation, not a
purpose of destruction.” (ibid., 165)
MATTHEW 15:(10-20),21-28 At first reading these two pericopes appear to
us to have no relation; but they must have had for Matthew. In vss. 10-
20 he gives us Jesus’ attitude to the strict interpretation of the
Holiness Code found in Leviticus. The Pharisees of Jesus’ time held that
whatever rules of ritual cleansing were good for the priests (Lev. 22:1-
16) were also applicable to lay people who earnestly kept the covenant
laws. For them, the Levitical code was designed to make all Israel a holy
people. Jesus did not cast the whole law aside, but only sought to make
it subservient to human need. The rules of ritual cleanliness must give
way if they served only to inhibit the meeting of real human need and
genuine moral obligation. This included application of the law to all
aspects of human relations.
The sayings of Jesus quoted in vss. 11, 13 and 14 may come from an early
source since they also appear almost verbatim in the sayings gospel known
in its 2d century Coptic translation of a Greek original known as the
Gospel of Thomas. Vs. 14 also appears in Luke 6:39 and is presumed to
come from the hypothetical tradition known as Q. No sooner had Jesus said
these things in Matthew’s account, however, than he faced an actual
situation which called for real life practice of them in relation to a
foreign woman.
The district of Tyre and Sidon was Canaanite territory on the
Mediterranean coast to the north and west of Galilee. The citizens were a
greatly mixed people who may still have had some Canaanite blood, but also
well diluted by infusions of Syrian and Phoenician elements. They were
Gentiles, of course, and thoroughly hellenized since the time of Alexander
the Great. The designation of a Canaanite woman in vs. 22 was a typically
Jewish term of reproach and disparagement, as is the troubling reference
by Jesus to dogs in vs. 26. Troubling as such words may be coming from
Jesus’ mouth, Jews did speak of their Gentile and pagan neighbors in such
terms. Matthew undoubtedly used the quotation for dramatic effect. His
obvious intent was not to categorize the woman or her ancestry, but to
sharpen the contrast and to show how Jesus changed his mind with regard to
this woman’s need.
Matthew wrote from a Jewish point of view for a predominantly Jewish
audience, but also for Jews who met in the church fellowship with many
Gentiles and sat with them in the agape meals preceding the Eucharist.
This story would have special meaning to such an audience.
Many scholars have proposed that the provenance of the gospel was actually
in Antioch, Damascus, or some other Syrian city with a mixed population
very much like this particular situation. The impact of the story to such
a congregation would be nothing short of astonishing. In effect, Matthew
here opened the door of freedom to both Jews and Gentiles in the same way
that Peter’s dream at Joppa and Paul’s conversion on the Damascus road had
done.
Jesus’ comment on the woman’s faith requires special note. She obviously
saw in this “son of David,” a synonym for a Jew, someone with a special
gift for healing. Three times she addressed him as “Lord,” but is this
Matthew’s designation emphasizing the sovereignty of Christ? As
Christians, we may think so; but did the Syro-Phoenician woman? Is it not
possible for people outside our tradition to have faith, “saving” faith -
Moslem faith, Hindu faith, Jewish faith, even Buddhist faith, although
Buddhists are not theists as those other traditions?
copyright - Comments by Rev. John Shearman and page by Richard J. Fairchild, 2006
please acknowledge the appropriate author if citing these resources.
|