Kumanen a Simba na Ordinarion Panaon (B)
Say Inkatoo nen Jesus
Siopa yan managtambal?
No maminsan, naipasabi tayo so labay tayon ibaga, aliwa lapud say insalita tayo no ag ingen, lapud no panon tayon naibaga. Makangel tayo na “Masantos ya kabuawan”, a manlalapud akasibangot ya lupa!
Nen imbaga na saman ya akating ed si Jesus, “ No labay mo, paabig mo ak”, anto so tono na impangibaga to? Ipapasabi to kasi so onya? “ Sigue, nayarian mon gawaen. Agka manduarowa, napaabig mo ak”.
Odino, susutilen to labat si Jesus: “No labay mo, paabig mo ak.” Samay kondisyon so akauna nen samay panambal. Ag manduarowa may akating ed say pakapanyari nen Jesus, say panduarowa-an to et say maong ya linawa to. Say tepet to et no LABAY nen Jesus ya sikatoy tambalen to. Abayag la siguro yan toon inpolisay na komunidad kanyan nakalan lay talek tan pananisia ed arum a too.
No panduarowaan na arum so maong ya gagala tan kanunotan tayo, manpasnok itayo. Ontan met kasi so liknaan nen Jesus? Diad say abasan ibanghilyo, akasian nen Jesus imay akating, kanian pinaabig to. Inggangan ton agton balot ibalitad anggan siopa; balet, imbabalita tod amin ya siansia. Lapud saman, si atambal et nayarian to lay manliber-liber; si Jesus et “manaayam ed pasen ya ag natotoowan.” Singa ra amo nansalatan na kipapasen. Anto met kasi liknaan nen Jesus lapud saya. Inibaan to la lanti imay too, sikato ni angiter na sengeg na irap to natan?
Siopa yan Jesus?
Samay inpanarapan nen Jesus tan samay akating so makapangiter na ebat ed sayan tepet tayo no siopa yan Jesus. Diad Ibanghilyo ya insulat nen Marcos, inpaneng-neng to ya si Jesus et tuan too: si Jesus ya walay liknaan; no maminsan manpasnok, manermen. Kanyan sirin, panon tayon natatalusan iyan Jesus?
Onung ed sikatayo, si Jesus kasi et ag balot naa-aburido? Ya ag balot nanirap? Wala kasi ra so liknaan to ed niduma-duma ran kipapasen? Amta to met kasi so manpasnok? Nakekesawan met kasi? Wala met kasi takot to ed saray ilalo na totoo ed sikato? Nikelawan met kasi?
Say inkatoo nen Jesus
Manisia si Marcos ya Evangelista ya si Jesus ed Anak na Dios, balet inpaneng-neng to ya si Jesus et sakey met ya tuan too. Tan lapud saya, sikatoy makatalus ed inkatoo tayo. No walay kerew tayo, ya singa samay kerew na akating, natatalusan to man ya kerew lapud amta to so liknaan no akin et onkekerew tayo ed saman.
Balet say inkatoo nen Jesus et aliwan rason ya sikatoy onkapoy; ingen, inpaneng-neng to ya lapud sikatoy too, natatalusan to itayo, kanian mas lalon naitdan toy gloria so Dios ya Ama to. Anggaman panduarowaan da so getma to, siansia nin inpaneng-neng toy kamaungan na Dios ya Katawan.
Gagawaen tayo kasin rason so inkatoo tayo pian napaulyan tayo so nepeg ya sumpalen tayo? Odino, say inkatoo tayo so rason no akin et naibelyaw tayo so gloria tan kamaungan na Dios, ya Ama tayo?
HOMILETIC IDEAS
Who are like lepers in our communities? What is our community's relationship to such people? Are there people whom we wouldn't want to touch? Would Jesus touch them? Do we ever feel like this leper? Have we ever experienced Jesus like this leper? How has Jesus healed and restored us to wholeness? Are we ever the priests in this story? Are our congregations the "them" who need a witness about the power and authority of Jesus?
When is it time to witness? When is it time to be silent? Most of us have no trouble being quiet about their faith. They can easily follow Jesus' command to say nothing to anyone. Yet, the leper was called by Jesus to be a witness to others -- not necessarily with his words, but by his actions. I maintain that every Christian is a witness -- their witness may be good or it may be bad -- but their actions, their words witness to who they are as people -- and people of God.
.
There is such a thing as an "easy-chair Christianity." As much as we may dislike talking to others about our faith, it was still probably easier for the leper than going through all the legal rituals of Leviticus 13-14, which Jesus had asked him to do. In our gospel lesson, the man is already healed, how should he respond to Jesus' commands? We don't seek to obey Jesus in order to get something from him, but in response to what Jesus has already given us.
Panmutektekan: Pangasinan
Siopa ra so saray akating ed komunidad tayo? Anto so gagawaen na komunidad ed saraya? Wala kasi so totoon agtayo ta “diwitin” o katongtongen? Anto kasi so gawaen nen Jesus ed saraya? Laen to ran diwitin to met ira kasi a singa inpadiwit tan inpanambal to ed samay akating?
Inpaneng –neng nen Jesus ed sikatayo no antoy nepeg ya gawaen tayo ed saray “akating” ed kapegleyan tayo. Lapud sikatayo so Kristiano, say panangaro tan panangasi nen Kristo so iter tayo ed amin, laut la ed saray mas mankaukolan.
Lapud saya, wala pakaabig ya nagawa. Ontan met komon so sumpalen tayo: say panpaabig na relasyon ed kapara tayo. Aliwan sikatayo so onarawi tan onbatik, no ag ingen sikatayo so onasinger, tan ipaneng –neng so panangasi tan pannagaro a singa inpaneng-neng nen Jesus.
EXEGETICAL NOTES AND REFLECTIONS
Mark 1:40-45
6th Sunday after the Epiphany - Year B
LARGER CONTEXT
In the following arrangement our text is related more closely with what precedes it than with what follows.
Jesus' Authority Over Demons and Illness (1:21-45)
a)The Beginnings in Capernaum (1:21-28)
b) Healing Peter's Mother-in-law (1:29-31)
c) Other Healings (1:32-34)
d) Departure from Capernaum (1:35-39)
e) Healing a Leper (1:40-45)
Jesus' Authority Over Sin and the Law (2:1-3:6)
a) Healing and Forgiving the Paralytic (2:1-12)
b) The Call of Levi (2:13-14)
c) Association with Sinners (2:15-17)
d) Jesus and Fasting (2:18-22)
e) Sabbath Violations (2:23-28)
f) Healing the Withered Hand (3:1-6)
In some ways our text relates to what goes before it. It is another healing story and there appears to be no opposition to Jesus' miracles in these stories. Jesus has already broken a few boundaries. Two of his healings were on the sabbath day. In our text, he touches the unclean leper.
In other ways our text relates to what follows it. Jesus may be putting himself in opposition to the priests in our story. In the miracle that follows, Jesus is certainly in opposition to the scribes. The events after that have the "scribes of the Pharisees" questioning Jesus' actions.
THE LEPER'S (ILLEGAL) ACTIONS
Why does the leper come to Jesus? By doing so, he breaks the rules of Leviticus 13-14.
The person who has the leprous disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head be disheveled; and he shall cover his upper lip and cry out, "Unclean, unclean." he shall remain unclean as long as he has the disease; he is unclean. He shall live alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp. [13:45-46, NRSV]
The leper does not cry out, "Unclean, unclean," -- a cry to have people stay away -- most literally he "is calling him [Jesus] to his side" ("parakaleo" -- a present tense participle -- it was an ongoing or continuous or repeated calling). This word is used as a summons or prayer or plea for help. The leper is the first one to cross the ritual boundaries. He approaches Jesus. He calls on him to come and help.
What is asks for is a present general condition in Greek. The translation of some of the words can influence the meaning.
The Protasis: If you are wishing / willing / wanting / desiring / etc.
The Apodosis: You are able to cleanse me / to declare me clean.
Especially if the translation "declare me clean" is used, this leper is approaching Jesus as a priest -- one who had the power and authority to declare lepers clean and thus restore them to normal society.
"The leper appears aware that his approach to Jesus, a nonpriest, was itself in violation of the symbolic system, which is why he gives Jesus a chance to refuse. It is almost as if he says, "You could declare me clean if only you would *dare* (1:40)."
"Faith" is not mentioned in any of these healings until 2:5 -- and then it is not the faith of the one who is healed. Yet, can we not say that the leper's approach to Jesus -- his disregard for the social and ritual rules -- his belief that Jesus had the power and authority to cleanse him or declare him clean, if Jesus should want to do so -- are actions of faith?
JESUS' EMOTIONS
Verse 41 presents a textual difficulty. Some ancient manuscripts have "splagchnistheis" = "having pity". Others have "orgistheis" = "being angry".
Metzger ("A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament") writes about this variant reading:
It is difficult to come to a firm decision concerning the original text. On the one hand, it is easy to see why orgistheis ("being angry") would have prompted over-scrupulous copyists to alter it to splagchnistheij ("being filled with compassion"), but not easy to account for the opposite change. On the other hand, a majority of the Committee was impressed by the following considerations. (1) The character of the external evidence in support of orgistheis is less impressive than the diversity and character of evidence that supports splagchnistheis. (2) At least two other passages in Mark, which represent Jesus as angry (3:5) or indignant )10:14), have not prompted over scrupulous copyists to make corrections. (3) It is possible that the reading orgistheis either (a) was suggested by embrimhsamenos of ver. 43, or (b) arose from confusion between similar words in Aramaic (compare Syriac ethraham, "he had pity," with ethra`am, "he was enraged"). [pp. 76-77]
Most translations have gone with the emotion of "pity" (or "compassion"). Sometimes there is a footnote about the "anger" reading, sometimes not. Matthew (81-4) and Luke (5:12-16) omitted these "emotional" terms in their accounts.
Ched Myers ("Binding the Strong Man") opts for the angry reading. After his comment about the leper *daring* Jesus to heal him, he writes:
Jesus does indeed dare, but Mark tells us he is angry* (orgistheis, 1:41). Then, after the declaration of wholeness has been delivered, Jesus, "snorting with indignation" (embrimesamenos), dispatches the man *back* to the priests (the probable meaning of exebalen). How are we to make sense of these strong emotions?
They only make sense if the man had *already been to the priests*, who for some reason had rejected his petition. Deciding to make an issue out of it, Jesus sternly gives the leper these orders:
See that you say nothing to anyone! Rather, go back and show yourself to the priest and make the offering prescribed by Moses for your cleansing as a witness against them [1:44]
The cleansed leper's task is not to publicize a miracle but to help confront an ideological system: the change in object (from "priest" to "them") suggests a protest against the entire purity apparatus, which the priests control. He is to make the offering for the purpose of "witnessing against them" (eis marturion autois). This is a technical phrase in the Gospel for testimony before hostile audiences (6:11; 13:9). [p. 153]
I agree with most of his word studies. I like the word "embrimaomai". It originally referred to the snorting noise horses made -- and I think they tried to duplicate the sound with this word. The same word is used later in Mark concerning the disciples' reaction to the woman who wastes her ointment on Jesus. They *scold* her, because the ointment could have been sold for about year's wages and the money given to the poor (Mark 14:5).
I'm not convinced that "exebalen" means to "send *back*". It usually means "to send or cast *out*." It is most often used of Jesus or disciples "casting out" demons or evil spirits. The prefix "ek" (or "ex") means "out" or "away". It is ironic, that when he was unclean and supposed to stay away from people, he comes to Jesus. Now that he is clean, Jesus sends him away.
The change from the singular "priest" to the plural "them" in v. 44 is interesting. Who are "they"? What is the "witness" ("martyrion") that the former-leper is to give them? It seems to me that his witness is to indicate to "them" that his healing and the declaration of his cleansing took place outside of their jurisdiction. Someone, namely Jesus, is undermining their (God-given) authority in the community. This also means that Jesus is undermining the Law as given by Moses.
COMMAND OF SILENCE
Jesus commands him to say nothing to anyone, but to go to the priests. Was he to tell the priests what happened? Could he share the news after performing the proper sacrifices?
Because the leper disobeyed and began proclaiming all over the place, Jesus is no longer able to enter cities openly. Why? One answer is that he became too popular with the people. I was at a high school basketball game where a well-known professional football player was in the audience. During half-time he was mobbed by fans wanting his autograph, which he gave. However, when the second half began, he shooed everyone away. He came to watch the game. Celebrities have a problem with going about openly. They can be mobbed. The crowds can keep them from doing what they really want to do.
There is another possible reason for Jesus staying outside the cities in the wilderness places -- he had become unclean by touching the leper. As the now-clean leper tells everyone what happened to him, it would have been clear to all the people that Jesus had become unclean. It was against the rules for anyone to associate with Jesus.
A third possibility is suggested by Malina and Rohrbaugh ("Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels") which they call "gossip backlash". They suggest that a purpose of gossip in nonliterate societies is to inform and validate ongoing gains and losses of honor status. If someone was claiming more status than his birthright provided (an action considered stealing in a limited-good society in which gain for one automatically meant loss for someone else), the gossip network could trigger a backlash that cut the claimant down to size very quickly. That may be the reason for Mark's note here (1:45) that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town. Since he is in his home region and his reputation is growing, backlash may have started. [p. 185]
The phrase, "getting too big for his britches" seems to capture some of the sense of this interpretation. Was Jesus, a carpenter's son from Nazareth, acting too big for his britches by declaring a leper clean -- actions that were limited by law to the priests?
Whatever the reasons, the leper's disobedience made life more difficult for Jesus. Have you ever thought that talking about your positive experiences with Jesus could be counter-productive? I maintain that proper evangelism begins with silence and listening. For news to be "good" for the hearer, it has to address their needs and concerns.
SUMMARY
I wonder if Jesus' negative emotions could have been caused by the fact that this leper put him between a rock and a hard place. The leper presented himself before Jesus with sufficient trust for a miracle to happen, but for Jesus to perform the miracle, Jesus had to bring the sick man's uncleanliness and unsociability upon himself. This would make open entrances into the towns and synagogues more difficult, if not impossible. Jesus was forced to make a change in the way he had planned to minister to the people. Yet, the crowds continued to come to Jesus out in the deserted places.
