Playing favorites
Commentary
Many of us know the feeling of being excluded or unwanted by another who plays favorites. It may have been a teacher who had "pets" among the students, but we were not one of them. Or perhaps it was an employer who favored certain people who treated him or her with deference. Racial and ethnic prejudice is, in the final analysis, a form of playing favorites. The majority always seems to want to favor themselves over the minority.
Humans seem inclined to favor some people over others. The reasons for such an inclination are beyond the interest of this column; however, in most cases it would seem that we favor those who make us feel better about ourselves. Favoritism may be the hidden ghost that haunts our society, especially given the relationship between favoritism and racial-ethnic discrimination. We pastors know, too, that congregations almost inevitably favor certain kinds of people as potential members of their body and are less favorable toward others. In different congregations, such favoritism takes different forms, but the propensity for religious bodies to prefer some over others seems almost intrinsic to their being.
Each of our lessons for this Sunday directs us to some form and/or some dimension of favoritism. If we follow those directions in each of the lessons, we find ourselves with a rather good analysis of favoritism.
Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23
The book of Proverbs has a rather consistent attitude toward any economic favoritism. This book is a kind of anthology of wisdom, a miscellany of sayings that captures basic human wisdom. Within the collection there are numerous forms of sayings, but the most common is a two line expression of some fundamental truth. Proverbs represents the basic idea that God's wisdom is found in specific and concrete summaries of traditional and cultural wisdom, which we might call "common sense." While the book as a whole was probably formed in the period after the exile, much of the content and perhaps some of the specific sayings had a longer life. For three Sundays (Propers 18-20) in the B cycle, we read portions of Proverbs.
The first two pair of verses in our reading from Proverbs for Proper 18 come from a brief collection of sayings in 22:1-16 in which the two line aphorisms deal generally with the question of how to make wise decisions and avoid being a fool. Verses 22-23 are part of a long section (22:17--24:22) that seems different from the previous one. In the three bits of the lesson, the two line form exhibits a basic feature of Hebraic poetry called parallelism, in which the two lines are related in some way or another. For instance, in verse 1 the parallelism between the two lines is synonymous, meaning simply that the second line repeats the content of the first line but in slightly different words. Such a pattern made sayings easy to memorize, and that was probably their function in teaching common wisdom. The three pairs of verses all have to do with relations between the rich and the poor, which is a common theme in Proverbs. (The word "poor" is found 36 times in the NRSV translation of the book.)
Verses 1-2 introduce the wisdom of seeking a reputation for favoring other people rather than acquiring wealth. Verse 2 provides us with a simple reason for not favoring wealth, namely, that God is the Creator of all people, both the rich and the poor.
The theme of the rich and poor is continued in verses 8 and 9, but now in the context of justice. The first of the couplets uses the well-worn metaphor of sowing and reaping to express what was originally the Deuteronomic (or retribution) ethic. According to this ethical scheme, doing good brought prosperity while doing evil resulted in disaster. Injustice will eventually produce only "calamity." The second half of verse 8 advances the same claim by saying that nations that exercise angry rule will finally "fail." "Rod" is a classic image for rulership (see Isaiah 14:5-6), and "anger" may be translated "fury" (see NIV). The translations omit the personal pronoun "his" from the second line and thereby blur its connection with the first. ("Whoever" is "he" in the Hebrew.) The second line applies the first line to governmental rulers.
Verse 9 states the truth of 8 from the other side, that is, from the side of "blessedness" rather than "injustice." Those who are "generous" (literally, have "a good eye") with their wealth are blessed by God in particular because they share what they have with the poor (see Deuteronomy 15:9). In the context of the ethic of retribution, "blessed" here probably means worldly prosperity, health, children, and so on, and should not be confused with Jesus' use of the word (e.g., Matthew 5:3-11).
The final pair of couplets (vv. 22-23) summarizes the attitude toward the poor implicit in what has come before. These two verses combine an admonition (v. 22) with a theological reason for the admonition (v. 23). The second line of verse 22 advances the exhortation not to "rob ... the poor" by including those who are treated unjustly in the legal system. Justice is determined at the "gate" (see Amos 5:12), and the "afflicted" in this case are those who receive only injustice. The reason for these commands is that God favors the poor, because they are not favored in society. God is the advocate for the poor and needy, pleading "their cause." However, God's justice does to the guilty what they have done to the poor ("despoil"), only more so. In other words, God matches the punishment with the crime, and those who plunder the poor are in turn plundered of their "life." The Hebrew word translated, "despoil" is rare in the Old Testament (see Malachi 3:8) and may be translated "plunder," suggesting the image of the conquering army ravaging their conquest.
The reading encourages us to favor meeting the needs of those who are the have-nots in our world. We should favor serving the needy over attaining wealth, because God favors the poor and afflicted. If the retribution (or Deuteronomic) ethic has any virtue, it is that God's justice is eventually done -- accomplished -- in our world. Verse 23 pictures God running to the side of the poor and needy and vindicating them. If God is so committed to justice for the unfavored of our world, then loving God entails taking up the divine cause in their behalf. We "play favorites" because God does.
James 2:1-10 (11-13) 14-17
James is been called a collection of "Christian wisdom," and in that way is comparable to Proverbs. In our reading James explores the relationship between faith and deeds, which is the subject of the whole of chapter 2. It begins with a scathing criticism of the mistreatment of the poor in favor of the wealthy (vv. 1-7), and then shows how such favoritism violates one part and consequently the whole of the Law. Finally, verses 14-17 begin the discussion of the relationship of faith and works which continues through 2:26.
The theme of "partiality" is introduced immediately in verse 1, but as part of a rather confusing statement. As a footnote in the NRSV indicates, the statement can be translated one of two ways: "Do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?" or "Do you really hold the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ without acts of favoritism?" The latter is probably preferable and would mean that the author is charging readers with being untrue to Jesus' faith.
James immediately goes on to give an example of what he means by favoritism (vv. 2-4). He contrasts "fine clothes" with "dirty clothes" and mentions "gold rings," like the ones worn by Romans to indicate their place in the social structure of the day. The rich person is seated close to the front and the poor person at the rear and in a position of inferiority ("sit at my feet"). This discrimination assumes we are the judge of others and produces a division within the congregation. Moreover, practicing favoritism in judgment is explicitly forbidden in Leviticus 19:15 (see also Matthew 7:1-5).
Verse 5 speaks again of God's favoritism for the poor in choosing poverty as the means toward a kind of wealth. (See Matthew 5:3 and Luke 6:20.) The reference is the poverty of Jesus, stripped and crucified, but has social implications as well. James challenges readers to recognize the source of their Christian lives and faith in Jesus' poverty and the contradiction between his poverty and their treatment of the poor. Verse 6 pushes the contradiction further by contrasting their treatment of the poor and the way the rich treat them. God has honored the poor, but the readers have dishonored them. By their actions in regard to the poor they are doing the very thing to them that has been done to them by the "rich who oppress you."
In the author's view, the readers have violated one part of the law (prohibiting favoritism) and thereby have violated the whole law (vv. 8-10). "The royal law" (nomon ... basilikon) is probably derived from Jesus' message about the "kingdom of God" (basileia tou theou), which is summarized in the law of love (Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 22:39; and Mark 12:31). Favoritism is basically a violation of love -- if you "love your neighbor as yourself," you cannot prefer some neighbors over others!
Verses 11-13 argue that you cannot favor only selected parts of the law and ignore others, and James claims that, even if you are obedient in some cases, it does not acquit you of disobedience in others. Verses 12 and 13 state the conclusion of the whole argument running from verse 1 through verse 13. We ought to live conscious of the fact that we will be (or are being) judged by God by means of the "law of liberty." The law frees us not only in the sense of releasing us from the necessity of disobedience but also in the sense that it transmits God's own freedom to us. In keeping the law, we take on God's own characteristics, for example, mercy and love. So, too, do we achieve God's own freedom through our obedience. Verse 13 once again claims that the judgment will fit the crime: If the crime is merciless, then the judgment will be without mercy. The final aphorism of that verse, "mercy triumphs over judgment," is not entirely clear, but it may mean that mercy "wins out" or "subdues" judgment in the sense that it dominates judgment.
With verse 14, James turns explicitly to the issue of the relationship between faith and works, which has been an underlying theme throughout the whole reading. In reading verses 14-26, we need to be careful not to understand "works" (erga) in a Pauline sense. For Paul "works" are often those things we do to try to win our own salvation, to attempt to make ourselves righteous enough to earn God's favor. James clearly understands works simply as good deeds which constitute part of faith. What is at stake here is the difference between an inauthentic faith that is not lived in behavior and an authentic faith which motivates deeds of love and mercy. Your authors think that, if Paul and James could sit down and discuss this issue, they would end up agreeing. Faith cannot "save" if it is faith that does not come to expression in the way we live.
James is capable of powerful examples, as we have already seen, and now he invokes still another rhetorical example that is both simple and obvious. If we simply pronounce the benediction over needy persons, we do them no good. Their need solicits our actions. The caricature of faith in the words, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," demonstrates all too well James' view of a whole and active faith. So, too, does his pronouncement that faith is lifeless without good deeds. Luther would agree!
James believes that the readers have shown a favoritism that contradicts God's view and the readers' own faith. "Partiality" is sin -- it's as simple as that. Most especially is partiality for the rich at the expense of the poor sinful, since it conflicts with God's way of saving us through making Christ poor. James' point about the treatment of the poor is oddly contemporary, since churches have still not always responded to the poor with care and love. However, all our acts which play favorites stand under judgment.
Mark 7:24-37
This lesson is comprised of two healing stories, the first of which is particularly relevant to the topic of favoritism. This portion of Mark follows immediately after the conclusion of the Gospel Lesson for last Sunday and has Jesus moving first into Tyre (v. 24) and then through Sidon into the Decapolis (v. 31). One healing takes place in each of the locations. We will treat them in reverse order, since it is the first story (vv. 24-30) on which we will concentrate.
The curing of the man with the hearing defect is both touching and amazing. His condition had affected his speech, and now his friends bring him to Jesus. Jesus prefers to do this healing in private for reasons that we may find in verse 36. This is one of the few stories of a healing in which Jesus practices something like ancient medicine (see also John 9:6-7). His actions are interesting. First, he puts his fingers in the man's ears, then spits and touches "his tongue." Next, he looks up, sighs, and utters the words "be opened" in Aramaic. The man is healed. This procedure is not unlike some accounts of other healings in the Greco-Roman world, and it uses the ancient idea that a holy man's spittle was filled with magical power. Mark's other stories of Jesus' healings and exorcisms show that the evangelist did not think Jesus was dependent on any form of ancient medicine. (See the exorcism from a distance in the previous story, vv. 24-30.) However, Mark is not afraid to tell us that Jesus used a variety of ways of demonstrating the healing power of the kingdom's presence in his ministry.
The story of the casting out of the demon that possessed the Syrophoenician woman's daughter is equally remarkable, both because it is an exorcism from a distance and because of the conversation between the woman and Jesus. Tyre was in northwestern Galilee, was inhabited almost entirely by Gentiles, and was loathed by Jews of the time. Jesus is trying to escape the crowds, but this desperate woman hears that he is in the region and finds him. We are told little about her daughter -- only that she was "little" and "had an unclean spirit" (v. 25). The woman bows down before Jesus, and then the narrator tells readers that she is a Gentile (literally "a Greek") whose home was in Syrophoenician.
The woman begs Jesus to heal her daughter, but he responds to her request cutely and rudely, equating her with a "dog." He first asserts the priority of the Jewish people through a metaphor that contrasts feeding the children before the dogs (see Romans 1:16). The verb translated "fed" (chorasthavai) more precisely means to be filled or satisfied. Jesus is saying that, because of the place of the Jews in God's plan of salvation, they must first be filled before anyone else. His remark about throwing the food to the dogs furthers his metaphor with a picture of a family meal with the pet dogs under the table begging for scraps. Jesus rejects the woman's request -- at least until the Jewish people had been served.
This desperate woman is not satisfied with Jesus' response and will not be discouraged by it. Cleverly and pathetically, she extends Jesus' metaphor, accepts her role as a begging dog, and states her willingness to eat only scraps from the table. Her retort impresses Jesus, and he grants her wish "for saying that." We are unsure what it was in the woman's words that evoked Jesus' mercy, for -- unlike Matthew -- Mark does not say that it was the woman's faith which moved Jesus (see Matthew 15:28). The healing is done, and the woman goes to her home to find her daughter well.
Jesus refused the woman's request because it violated his sense of the priority of the Jews in his mission. The Synoptics are not entirely consistent in reporting the degree to which Jesus ministered to Gentiles (compare Matthew 15:24 and Luke 9:51-55), but this story suggests that Jesus shared the early church's sense of the priority of the Jews. Did the woman challenge Jesus' own partiality for his people? Did he see in her a kind of faith that made him rethink his feelings about Gentiles? Or, is the dialogue with the woman his clever way of testing her faith? Whichever the case may be, the Syrophoenician woman turned Jesus' favoritism for the Jews upside down. Her willingness to regard herself as the equivalent of the puppy under the table, hoping one of the children would drop a morsel, is an expression of faith that Jesus could not ignore. If there is a divine favoritism for the Jews, we will gladly take our place as begging puppies under the table.
God has indeed shown a favoritism in that we have been favored with the divine love; but the favor of God's grace shows no partiality among humans (Acts 10:34). Consequently, in faithfulness to God's actions on our behalf in Christ, neither can we show any favoritism toward others. The lessons challenge us to examine our attitudes and actions, to identify the remnants of favoritism in our congregation, and to seek God's grace to rise above them. God's favoritism, however, is exercised in order to ensure that justice is done. Consequently, our self-examination of favoritism needs to be done in the light of divine justice and in the confidence that "mercy triumphs over judgment."
FIRST LESSON FOCUS
By Elizabeth Achtemeier
Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23
In both Mesopotamia and Egypt, but also in Israel, Wisdom teaching and theology held a respected position in the ancient Near East. In the life of Israel, as that is enshrined for us in the Old Testament, Wisdom thinking came more to the fore in the postexilic period than previously. Nevertheless, some Wisdom theology is found throughout the Bible.
The theology of Wisdom, which is really a basic view of creation, is that God has set certain orders into his creation -- specific ways in which both nature and human beings typically react. By careful observation, Wisdom illumines those orders, and as one learns to live in accordance with such orders, one is wise and finds life. If one ignores such orders, she or he is a fool and brings upon him or herself destruction and death.
Scholars have divided the book of Proverbs into nine collections. Verses 1-2 and 8-9 of our text come from the collection found in section II (10:1--22:16), verses 22-23 come from section III (22:17--24:22). Nevertheless, the overall theme of our stated lesson has to do with social justice toward the poor. Verses 1-2 and 8-9 have the typical two-line Wisdom form of a mashal, or saying, while verses 22-23 elaborate on that form, giving the reason or motivation in verse 23 for the saying contained in verse 22.
Obviously, the stated verses are directed to the wealthy, or at least to those who are well-off. Thus, they are relevant to most American church congregations, although they could be pertinent to almost any Christian gathering, rich or poor. All are told that a good name in one's community is much to be preferred to wealth, and of course, that is true. How many rich scoundrels have gone to their grave, despised and unmourned by anyone, their passing a relief to all who have known them? Then our text turns to instruct us toward the poor.
It is noteworthy that our attitude toward the poor is to be grounded in our faith (v. 2a). We have this in common with all persons, no matter what our financial status: we all have been created by God (v. 2b). God values each individual that he has made, knitting them together with bones and sinews (cf. Job 10:11), shaping them fearfully and wonderfully (cf. Psalm 139:14) in his image (cf. Genesis 1:2-28), to come forth into the world and to have a place in his purpose. Can we then say that some poor individual is less important and valuable than we, and that they are not to be honored and cared for and loved as much as we? To say such things is to defy the intentions of God and to denigrate his work. The verses that follow in our stated lesson, therefore, are to be understood in the context of that divine intention and creation.
First, in verse 8, we hear that the one who treats a poor person unjustly -- and judging from the preceding verse, the reference is probably to a court of law -- will meet with calamity. A rich plaintiff, judge, or lawyer may despise someone poor and helpless and take out his attitude on someone who is weak, but that is not the last word. God will not bless such an attitude (v. 9). The unjust cannot have fullness of life from the Creator. Rather, it is the person who is willing to share what he or she has with the poor who will live in God's sight. And that is the final criterion, isn't it? How do we stand with God? Jesus told us that wise view in parable after parable (cf. e.g. Matthew 18:23-35). God makes the final decisions about our life, and he defends the poor and helpless.
The same wisdom is taught in verses 22-23 of our stated text. Once again the context is that of a court of law. The reference to "the gate" refers to the lawsuits that were decided by the elders of a town at the site of their town gates. In biblical times, often a person who was poor found himself judged guilty of a debt and either thrown into prison or subjected to slavery in order to pay what he owed (cf. e.g. Amos 2:6-7; 8:6). So too, still in our courts, the person who has little or no money to defend him or herself often receives not a just judgment but a travesty decided on the basis of wealth. But once again, says our text, the final judge is God, who will not grant life to the unjust.
Ultimately, however, we must remember that it is not the fear of God's punishment or the desire to be rewarded with good that should prompt our care and justice for the poor. Rather, the truly faithful person is the one whose love of God is so full that it overflows with love toward her or his fellow human beings, no matter what their status and condition.
Lutheran Option -- Isaiah 35:4-7a
Chapter 35 in the prophecies of Isaiah of Jerusalem (Isaiah 1-39) has always been something of an enigma to scholars. It is so reminiscent of the prophecies of the Second Isaiah (chs. 40-55) that it has often been placed in that context, as addressed to the exiles in Babylonia. However, no specific historical setting is presumed by the chapter. Rather, it is a general announcement of the glorious future that awaits Judah in the purposes of God. Some scholars, therefore, consider the chapter to be later than Second Isaiah. Others say it is addressed to a pre-exilic dispersion of Israel. Whatever the chapter's specific historical context, its intention is clear: to delineate the new age that God will bring in for his faithful people. Thus, the chapter is quite relevant to us in our time who await the coming in its fullness of the new age of God's kingdom on earth.
Throughout the Scriptures and embedded deeply in the faith of the Christian Church is the belief that this world, with its violence and evil and death, is not the last word. Rather, God is working steadily, often invisibly, but always surely in human history to make all things new, to restore to his creation the goodness that he intended for it in the beginning. The powers and presence of that new age began to break into history in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Mark 1:15; Luke 11:20). But Jesus Christ will come again to bring in the new age of the kingdom in its fullness. At that time, God will put down all of the enemies to his universal and cosmic rule, banish death forever, heal all imperfections, and be acknowledged by his whole creation as Lord over all. Our chapter here in Isaiah 35 vividly portrays, therefore, what that new age will look like.
Our text begins with an assurance to the faithful that no matter what their condition or suffering in the present time, God will come to banish his enemies of injustice, suffering, and death, and to give to his loyal followers the fullness of salvation. As Revelation 21:3-4 phrases it, "God himself will be with them; he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away."
That means, therefore, that the imperfections of human life will be replaced by wholeness. The blind will once again see, the deaf will once again hear, the lame will once again leap for joy, and the dumb will speak (vv. 5-6) -- all healings that were presaged in the ministry of Jesus (cf. Matthew 11:5 and parallel; John 9:6-7), who incarnated in his person the beginning of the new age, and whose ministry and triumphant resurrection guarantee that these restorations will come.
The new age of the kingdom will bring healing not only to human beings, however, but to all of God's creation that has been so corrupted by human sin. As Paul wrote, "We know that the whole creation has been groaning together in travail together until now" (Romans 8:22). Even the natural world is not as it should be, but has been spoiled and become "red of tooth and claw." And so our text metaphorically portrays the desert of the wilderness watered finally with streams and the thirsty ground provided with life-giving pools for all things and creatures. In the Kingdom of God, nature too will bloom in all its fullness, a tribute of beauty and fecundity to the rule and lordship of God. God's rule over all his creation will bring life -- life in its fullness of joy and beauty, of health and well-being, of order and peace -- shalom, salvation, good.
Humans seem inclined to favor some people over others. The reasons for such an inclination are beyond the interest of this column; however, in most cases it would seem that we favor those who make us feel better about ourselves. Favoritism may be the hidden ghost that haunts our society, especially given the relationship between favoritism and racial-ethnic discrimination. We pastors know, too, that congregations almost inevitably favor certain kinds of people as potential members of their body and are less favorable toward others. In different congregations, such favoritism takes different forms, but the propensity for religious bodies to prefer some over others seems almost intrinsic to their being.
Each of our lessons for this Sunday directs us to some form and/or some dimension of favoritism. If we follow those directions in each of the lessons, we find ourselves with a rather good analysis of favoritism.
Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23
The book of Proverbs has a rather consistent attitude toward any economic favoritism. This book is a kind of anthology of wisdom, a miscellany of sayings that captures basic human wisdom. Within the collection there are numerous forms of sayings, but the most common is a two line expression of some fundamental truth. Proverbs represents the basic idea that God's wisdom is found in specific and concrete summaries of traditional and cultural wisdom, which we might call "common sense." While the book as a whole was probably formed in the period after the exile, much of the content and perhaps some of the specific sayings had a longer life. For three Sundays (Propers 18-20) in the B cycle, we read portions of Proverbs.
The first two pair of verses in our reading from Proverbs for Proper 18 come from a brief collection of sayings in 22:1-16 in which the two line aphorisms deal generally with the question of how to make wise decisions and avoid being a fool. Verses 22-23 are part of a long section (22:17--24:22) that seems different from the previous one. In the three bits of the lesson, the two line form exhibits a basic feature of Hebraic poetry called parallelism, in which the two lines are related in some way or another. For instance, in verse 1 the parallelism between the two lines is synonymous, meaning simply that the second line repeats the content of the first line but in slightly different words. Such a pattern made sayings easy to memorize, and that was probably their function in teaching common wisdom. The three pairs of verses all have to do with relations between the rich and the poor, which is a common theme in Proverbs. (The word "poor" is found 36 times in the NRSV translation of the book.)
Verses 1-2 introduce the wisdom of seeking a reputation for favoring other people rather than acquiring wealth. Verse 2 provides us with a simple reason for not favoring wealth, namely, that God is the Creator of all people, both the rich and the poor.
The theme of the rich and poor is continued in verses 8 and 9, but now in the context of justice. The first of the couplets uses the well-worn metaphor of sowing and reaping to express what was originally the Deuteronomic (or retribution) ethic. According to this ethical scheme, doing good brought prosperity while doing evil resulted in disaster. Injustice will eventually produce only "calamity." The second half of verse 8 advances the same claim by saying that nations that exercise angry rule will finally "fail." "Rod" is a classic image for rulership (see Isaiah 14:5-6), and "anger" may be translated "fury" (see NIV). The translations omit the personal pronoun "his" from the second line and thereby blur its connection with the first. ("Whoever" is "he" in the Hebrew.) The second line applies the first line to governmental rulers.
Verse 9 states the truth of 8 from the other side, that is, from the side of "blessedness" rather than "injustice." Those who are "generous" (literally, have "a good eye") with their wealth are blessed by God in particular because they share what they have with the poor (see Deuteronomy 15:9). In the context of the ethic of retribution, "blessed" here probably means worldly prosperity, health, children, and so on, and should not be confused with Jesus' use of the word (e.g., Matthew 5:3-11).
The final pair of couplets (vv. 22-23) summarizes the attitude toward the poor implicit in what has come before. These two verses combine an admonition (v. 22) with a theological reason for the admonition (v. 23). The second line of verse 22 advances the exhortation not to "rob ... the poor" by including those who are treated unjustly in the legal system. Justice is determined at the "gate" (see Amos 5:12), and the "afflicted" in this case are those who receive only injustice. The reason for these commands is that God favors the poor, because they are not favored in society. God is the advocate for the poor and needy, pleading "their cause." However, God's justice does to the guilty what they have done to the poor ("despoil"), only more so. In other words, God matches the punishment with the crime, and those who plunder the poor are in turn plundered of their "life." The Hebrew word translated, "despoil" is rare in the Old Testament (see Malachi 3:8) and may be translated "plunder," suggesting the image of the conquering army ravaging their conquest.
The reading encourages us to favor meeting the needs of those who are the have-nots in our world. We should favor serving the needy over attaining wealth, because God favors the poor and afflicted. If the retribution (or Deuteronomic) ethic has any virtue, it is that God's justice is eventually done -- accomplished -- in our world. Verse 23 pictures God running to the side of the poor and needy and vindicating them. If God is so committed to justice for the unfavored of our world, then loving God entails taking up the divine cause in their behalf. We "play favorites" because God does.
James 2:1-10 (11-13) 14-17
James is been called a collection of "Christian wisdom," and in that way is comparable to Proverbs. In our reading James explores the relationship between faith and deeds, which is the subject of the whole of chapter 2. It begins with a scathing criticism of the mistreatment of the poor in favor of the wealthy (vv. 1-7), and then shows how such favoritism violates one part and consequently the whole of the Law. Finally, verses 14-17 begin the discussion of the relationship of faith and works which continues through 2:26.
The theme of "partiality" is introduced immediately in verse 1, but as part of a rather confusing statement. As a footnote in the NRSV indicates, the statement can be translated one of two ways: "Do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ?" or "Do you really hold the faith of our glorious Lord Jesus Christ without acts of favoritism?" The latter is probably preferable and would mean that the author is charging readers with being untrue to Jesus' faith.
James immediately goes on to give an example of what he means by favoritism (vv. 2-4). He contrasts "fine clothes" with "dirty clothes" and mentions "gold rings," like the ones worn by Romans to indicate their place in the social structure of the day. The rich person is seated close to the front and the poor person at the rear and in a position of inferiority ("sit at my feet"). This discrimination assumes we are the judge of others and produces a division within the congregation. Moreover, practicing favoritism in judgment is explicitly forbidden in Leviticus 19:15 (see also Matthew 7:1-5).
Verse 5 speaks again of God's favoritism for the poor in choosing poverty as the means toward a kind of wealth. (See Matthew 5:3 and Luke 6:20.) The reference is the poverty of Jesus, stripped and crucified, but has social implications as well. James challenges readers to recognize the source of their Christian lives and faith in Jesus' poverty and the contradiction between his poverty and their treatment of the poor. Verse 6 pushes the contradiction further by contrasting their treatment of the poor and the way the rich treat them. God has honored the poor, but the readers have dishonored them. By their actions in regard to the poor they are doing the very thing to them that has been done to them by the "rich who oppress you."
In the author's view, the readers have violated one part of the law (prohibiting favoritism) and thereby have violated the whole law (vv. 8-10). "The royal law" (nomon ... basilikon) is probably derived from Jesus' message about the "kingdom of God" (basileia tou theou), which is summarized in the law of love (Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 22:39; and Mark 12:31). Favoritism is basically a violation of love -- if you "love your neighbor as yourself," you cannot prefer some neighbors over others!
Verses 11-13 argue that you cannot favor only selected parts of the law and ignore others, and James claims that, even if you are obedient in some cases, it does not acquit you of disobedience in others. Verses 12 and 13 state the conclusion of the whole argument running from verse 1 through verse 13. We ought to live conscious of the fact that we will be (or are being) judged by God by means of the "law of liberty." The law frees us not only in the sense of releasing us from the necessity of disobedience but also in the sense that it transmits God's own freedom to us. In keeping the law, we take on God's own characteristics, for example, mercy and love. So, too, do we achieve God's own freedom through our obedience. Verse 13 once again claims that the judgment will fit the crime: If the crime is merciless, then the judgment will be without mercy. The final aphorism of that verse, "mercy triumphs over judgment," is not entirely clear, but it may mean that mercy "wins out" or "subdues" judgment in the sense that it dominates judgment.
With verse 14, James turns explicitly to the issue of the relationship between faith and works, which has been an underlying theme throughout the whole reading. In reading verses 14-26, we need to be careful not to understand "works" (erga) in a Pauline sense. For Paul "works" are often those things we do to try to win our own salvation, to attempt to make ourselves righteous enough to earn God's favor. James clearly understands works simply as good deeds which constitute part of faith. What is at stake here is the difference between an inauthentic faith that is not lived in behavior and an authentic faith which motivates deeds of love and mercy. Your authors think that, if Paul and James could sit down and discuss this issue, they would end up agreeing. Faith cannot "save" if it is faith that does not come to expression in the way we live.
James is capable of powerful examples, as we have already seen, and now he invokes still another rhetorical example that is both simple and obvious. If we simply pronounce the benediction over needy persons, we do them no good. Their need solicits our actions. The caricature of faith in the words, "Go in peace; keep warm and eat your fill," demonstrates all too well James' view of a whole and active faith. So, too, does his pronouncement that faith is lifeless without good deeds. Luther would agree!
James believes that the readers have shown a favoritism that contradicts God's view and the readers' own faith. "Partiality" is sin -- it's as simple as that. Most especially is partiality for the rich at the expense of the poor sinful, since it conflicts with God's way of saving us through making Christ poor. James' point about the treatment of the poor is oddly contemporary, since churches have still not always responded to the poor with care and love. However, all our acts which play favorites stand under judgment.
Mark 7:24-37
This lesson is comprised of two healing stories, the first of which is particularly relevant to the topic of favoritism. This portion of Mark follows immediately after the conclusion of the Gospel Lesson for last Sunday and has Jesus moving first into Tyre (v. 24) and then through Sidon into the Decapolis (v. 31). One healing takes place in each of the locations. We will treat them in reverse order, since it is the first story (vv. 24-30) on which we will concentrate.
The curing of the man with the hearing defect is both touching and amazing. His condition had affected his speech, and now his friends bring him to Jesus. Jesus prefers to do this healing in private for reasons that we may find in verse 36. This is one of the few stories of a healing in which Jesus practices something like ancient medicine (see also John 9:6-7). His actions are interesting. First, he puts his fingers in the man's ears, then spits and touches "his tongue." Next, he looks up, sighs, and utters the words "be opened" in Aramaic. The man is healed. This procedure is not unlike some accounts of other healings in the Greco-Roman world, and it uses the ancient idea that a holy man's spittle was filled with magical power. Mark's other stories of Jesus' healings and exorcisms show that the evangelist did not think Jesus was dependent on any form of ancient medicine. (See the exorcism from a distance in the previous story, vv. 24-30.) However, Mark is not afraid to tell us that Jesus used a variety of ways of demonstrating the healing power of the kingdom's presence in his ministry.
The story of the casting out of the demon that possessed the Syrophoenician woman's daughter is equally remarkable, both because it is an exorcism from a distance and because of the conversation between the woman and Jesus. Tyre was in northwestern Galilee, was inhabited almost entirely by Gentiles, and was loathed by Jews of the time. Jesus is trying to escape the crowds, but this desperate woman hears that he is in the region and finds him. We are told little about her daughter -- only that she was "little" and "had an unclean spirit" (v. 25). The woman bows down before Jesus, and then the narrator tells readers that she is a Gentile (literally "a Greek") whose home was in Syrophoenician.
The woman begs Jesus to heal her daughter, but he responds to her request cutely and rudely, equating her with a "dog." He first asserts the priority of the Jewish people through a metaphor that contrasts feeding the children before the dogs (see Romans 1:16). The verb translated "fed" (chorasthavai) more precisely means to be filled or satisfied. Jesus is saying that, because of the place of the Jews in God's plan of salvation, they must first be filled before anyone else. His remark about throwing the food to the dogs furthers his metaphor with a picture of a family meal with the pet dogs under the table begging for scraps. Jesus rejects the woman's request -- at least until the Jewish people had been served.
This desperate woman is not satisfied with Jesus' response and will not be discouraged by it. Cleverly and pathetically, she extends Jesus' metaphor, accepts her role as a begging dog, and states her willingness to eat only scraps from the table. Her retort impresses Jesus, and he grants her wish "for saying that." We are unsure what it was in the woman's words that evoked Jesus' mercy, for -- unlike Matthew -- Mark does not say that it was the woman's faith which moved Jesus (see Matthew 15:28). The healing is done, and the woman goes to her home to find her daughter well.
Jesus refused the woman's request because it violated his sense of the priority of the Jews in his mission. The Synoptics are not entirely consistent in reporting the degree to which Jesus ministered to Gentiles (compare Matthew 15:24 and Luke 9:51-55), but this story suggests that Jesus shared the early church's sense of the priority of the Jews. Did the woman challenge Jesus' own partiality for his people? Did he see in her a kind of faith that made him rethink his feelings about Gentiles? Or, is the dialogue with the woman his clever way of testing her faith? Whichever the case may be, the Syrophoenician woman turned Jesus' favoritism for the Jews upside down. Her willingness to regard herself as the equivalent of the puppy under the table, hoping one of the children would drop a morsel, is an expression of faith that Jesus could not ignore. If there is a divine favoritism for the Jews, we will gladly take our place as begging puppies under the table.
God has indeed shown a favoritism in that we have been favored with the divine love; but the favor of God's grace shows no partiality among humans (Acts 10:34). Consequently, in faithfulness to God's actions on our behalf in Christ, neither can we show any favoritism toward others. The lessons challenge us to examine our attitudes and actions, to identify the remnants of favoritism in our congregation, and to seek God's grace to rise above them. God's favoritism, however, is exercised in order to ensure that justice is done. Consequently, our self-examination of favoritism needs to be done in the light of divine justice and in the confidence that "mercy triumphs over judgment."
FIRST LESSON FOCUS
By Elizabeth Achtemeier
Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23
In both Mesopotamia and Egypt, but also in Israel, Wisdom teaching and theology held a respected position in the ancient Near East. In the life of Israel, as that is enshrined for us in the Old Testament, Wisdom thinking came more to the fore in the postexilic period than previously. Nevertheless, some Wisdom theology is found throughout the Bible.
The theology of Wisdom, which is really a basic view of creation, is that God has set certain orders into his creation -- specific ways in which both nature and human beings typically react. By careful observation, Wisdom illumines those orders, and as one learns to live in accordance with such orders, one is wise and finds life. If one ignores such orders, she or he is a fool and brings upon him or herself destruction and death.
Scholars have divided the book of Proverbs into nine collections. Verses 1-2 and 8-9 of our text come from the collection found in section II (10:1--22:16), verses 22-23 come from section III (22:17--24:22). Nevertheless, the overall theme of our stated lesson has to do with social justice toward the poor. Verses 1-2 and 8-9 have the typical two-line Wisdom form of a mashal, or saying, while verses 22-23 elaborate on that form, giving the reason or motivation in verse 23 for the saying contained in verse 22.
Obviously, the stated verses are directed to the wealthy, or at least to those who are well-off. Thus, they are relevant to most American church congregations, although they could be pertinent to almost any Christian gathering, rich or poor. All are told that a good name in one's community is much to be preferred to wealth, and of course, that is true. How many rich scoundrels have gone to their grave, despised and unmourned by anyone, their passing a relief to all who have known them? Then our text turns to instruct us toward the poor.
It is noteworthy that our attitude toward the poor is to be grounded in our faith (v. 2a). We have this in common with all persons, no matter what our financial status: we all have been created by God (v. 2b). God values each individual that he has made, knitting them together with bones and sinews (cf. Job 10:11), shaping them fearfully and wonderfully (cf. Psalm 139:14) in his image (cf. Genesis 1:2-28), to come forth into the world and to have a place in his purpose. Can we then say that some poor individual is less important and valuable than we, and that they are not to be honored and cared for and loved as much as we? To say such things is to defy the intentions of God and to denigrate his work. The verses that follow in our stated lesson, therefore, are to be understood in the context of that divine intention and creation.
First, in verse 8, we hear that the one who treats a poor person unjustly -- and judging from the preceding verse, the reference is probably to a court of law -- will meet with calamity. A rich plaintiff, judge, or lawyer may despise someone poor and helpless and take out his attitude on someone who is weak, but that is not the last word. God will not bless such an attitude (v. 9). The unjust cannot have fullness of life from the Creator. Rather, it is the person who is willing to share what he or she has with the poor who will live in God's sight. And that is the final criterion, isn't it? How do we stand with God? Jesus told us that wise view in parable after parable (cf. e.g. Matthew 18:23-35). God makes the final decisions about our life, and he defends the poor and helpless.
The same wisdom is taught in verses 22-23 of our stated text. Once again the context is that of a court of law. The reference to "the gate" refers to the lawsuits that were decided by the elders of a town at the site of their town gates. In biblical times, often a person who was poor found himself judged guilty of a debt and either thrown into prison or subjected to slavery in order to pay what he owed (cf. e.g. Amos 2:6-7; 8:6). So too, still in our courts, the person who has little or no money to defend him or herself often receives not a just judgment but a travesty decided on the basis of wealth. But once again, says our text, the final judge is God, who will not grant life to the unjust.
Ultimately, however, we must remember that it is not the fear of God's punishment or the desire to be rewarded with good that should prompt our care and justice for the poor. Rather, the truly faithful person is the one whose love of God is so full that it overflows with love toward her or his fellow human beings, no matter what their status and condition.
Lutheran Option -- Isaiah 35:4-7a
Chapter 35 in the prophecies of Isaiah of Jerusalem (Isaiah 1-39) has always been something of an enigma to scholars. It is so reminiscent of the prophecies of the Second Isaiah (chs. 40-55) that it has often been placed in that context, as addressed to the exiles in Babylonia. However, no specific historical setting is presumed by the chapter. Rather, it is a general announcement of the glorious future that awaits Judah in the purposes of God. Some scholars, therefore, consider the chapter to be later than Second Isaiah. Others say it is addressed to a pre-exilic dispersion of Israel. Whatever the chapter's specific historical context, its intention is clear: to delineate the new age that God will bring in for his faithful people. Thus, the chapter is quite relevant to us in our time who await the coming in its fullness of the new age of God's kingdom on earth.
Throughout the Scriptures and embedded deeply in the faith of the Christian Church is the belief that this world, with its violence and evil and death, is not the last word. Rather, God is working steadily, often invisibly, but always surely in human history to make all things new, to restore to his creation the goodness that he intended for it in the beginning. The powers and presence of that new age began to break into history in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Mark 1:15; Luke 11:20). But Jesus Christ will come again to bring in the new age of the kingdom in its fullness. At that time, God will put down all of the enemies to his universal and cosmic rule, banish death forever, heal all imperfections, and be acknowledged by his whole creation as Lord over all. Our chapter here in Isaiah 35 vividly portrays, therefore, what that new age will look like.
Our text begins with an assurance to the faithful that no matter what their condition or suffering in the present time, God will come to banish his enemies of injustice, suffering, and death, and to give to his loyal followers the fullness of salvation. As Revelation 21:3-4 phrases it, "God himself will be with them; he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away."
That means, therefore, that the imperfections of human life will be replaced by wholeness. The blind will once again see, the deaf will once again hear, the lame will once again leap for joy, and the dumb will speak (vv. 5-6) -- all healings that were presaged in the ministry of Jesus (cf. Matthew 11:5 and parallel; John 9:6-7), who incarnated in his person the beginning of the new age, and whose ministry and triumphant resurrection guarantee that these restorations will come.
The new age of the kingdom will bring healing not only to human beings, however, but to all of God's creation that has been so corrupted by human sin. As Paul wrote, "We know that the whole creation has been groaning together in travail together until now" (Romans 8:22). Even the natural world is not as it should be, but has been spoiled and become "red of tooth and claw." And so our text metaphorically portrays the desert of the wilderness watered finally with streams and the thirsty ground provided with life-giving pools for all things and creatures. In the Kingdom of God, nature too will bloom in all its fullness, a tribute of beauty and fecundity to the rule and lordship of God. God's rule over all his creation will bring life -- life in its fullness of joy and beauty, of health and well-being, of order and peace -- shalom, salvation, good.
