That
does not mean that God curses the hermit or the solitary life.
This scripture does not preclude other deep and faithful relationships
outside of one between a male and female. The passage never mentions
the institution of marriage itself. It does not mean that God
doesn't want us to have a deep attachment to a dog, cat or other
household pet. When Jesus' opponents try to pin Jesus down by
asking what is allowed when one wishes to break off a marriage
relationship, Jesus quotes from this passage to affirm that from
the beginning of human existence, loneliness, alienation, and
broken, abusive, and deceitful relationships are not what God
wishes or wills upon us.
The
incident in today’s Gospel passage occurs during Jesus'
final journey to Jerusalem. Jesus is faced with disciples who
do not understand what Jesus is saying to them. At the same time,
Jesus is confronted by an increasing number of opponents who try
to trap him into a predetermined yes or no answer so that they
can pounce on him no matter what he says.
Later,
Jesus will be asked, "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar
or not?" Jesus understands the trap and does not answer yes
or no. Jesus never tells us what we should do about our taxes,
but instead redefines and expands the question into a wider lesson
about God's value of people over the maintenance needs of any
of the world's institutions. Jesus doesn't issue a blanket condemnation
of those who pay taxes or of those who don’t. Jesus reminds
us that we belong to God and we are all brothers and sisters in
God’s family, not slaves to the ideology of any worldly
state.
The
question asked of Jesus about divorce is a similar trap. It is
hurled as a weapon, to strike and defeat an opponent. In Jesus’
culture a man could divorce his wife for essentially frivolous
reasons while a woman had no rights to divorce at all. Whatever
Jesus originally said specifically about divorce in reply to this
question had already been adjusted by the time Mark wrote the
Gospel, for Mark’s Gospel assumes the reality of a Roman
society that provided the right for both husband and wife to initiate
a divorce. Mark’s Gospel allowed no exceptions to justify
divorce. Matthew would adjust what Mark thought Jesus had said
to allow divorce on grounds of adultery, and Paul, for whom the
issue of mixed marriages was a new phenomena in the church, would
further allow divorce for the non-Christian party. That’s
not a severe reproach on Mark, Matthew or Paul. The Gospels and
letters of Paul were separated by only a few decades, yet they
struggled with what God intended in the light of their particular
circumstances. We are challenged by the vastly changed social
and economic circumstances of nearly two millennia. The church
is most discerning and helpful when it struggles with God’s
intent for creation in the light of current circumstances.
On
the way to Jerusalem, the disciples debated their positions of
influence and power. They anticipated a new kingdom where they
would be rewarded for their loyalty, wielding broad authority
while seated on their thrones. For now, they were at war with
Jesus' opponents and the stakes were large, for Jesus’ entire
ministry was being attacked. Small wonder it was hard for them
to hear what Jesus was really saying. Jesus wanted to teach about
what supports mutual trust, care, and responsibility in human
interaction. But it was only much later that they came to appreciate
the value of deep and lasting relationships. At the moment they
so much wanted to be right and come out on top. Obviously they
had no time for children either. Children were a nuisance; children
could not raise money for their cause or go out and enlist supporters.
Children were unpredictable, undependable and hard to organize.
Children had no voice in their society anyway, so why bother with
them.
Jesus
knew that, just as in war, truth is the first casualty in broken
and adversarial relationships. Children often become their principal
and overlooked victims. Seeking to gain advantage or to be proven
right over another is no way to build or repair healthy bonds.
That is why the most important part of this passage is likely
not the answer that we think Jesus might have given, but very
well may be when Jesus paid attention and took children into his
arms. Jesus knew well the heartache and pain of divorce. He knew
that children experienced it keenly. He didn't need to extensively
preach about it. He knew that life's situations were characteristically
messy and complex, and predetermined answers, without regard to
circumstances, could easily be used to obscure, if not frustrate,
God's intent. So rather than arguing, Jesus held a child close
to Him.
And
I offer this to you in the name of the Living God, Amen.
