The Last Week
Summer 2007 Bible Study

Chapter 2

"St. Joan of Arc Bible Study is an open and growing group that meets for fellowship and to discuss the Bible and other faith-centered literature. Our informal study group draws from biblical scholarship, historical perspectives, current events and personal reflections. We welcome honor and respect the personal ideas and spiritual journeys of all who join us."

Greetings

Heat and humidity were no match for the enthusiasm of St. Joan's Scripture Study group. Nineteen people, including new members and prodigal members, endured the stickiness, but relative coolness, of Hospitality Hall (aka the Church Basement) to consider Chapter Two, "Monday" of Borg and Crossan's "The Last Week."

ST JOAN OF ARC SCRIPTURE STUDY
July 24, 2007

The Last Week
By Borg & Crossan
Chapter Two "Monday"

Mark 11: 12 - 19 covers Monday of the first Holy Week, the last week of Jesus' life. There are two stories that occurred on that Monday: the cursing of the fig tree, and the confrontation with the moneychangers in the Temple.

Read Jeremiah 7: 1 - 29 as a preface to Mark. Mark must have been assuming his readers were familiar with Jeremiah - that's why Mark writes so sparsely; but that creates a lot of head scratching by those of us who have not done our homework, so to speak.

For instance, why the juxtaposition of the fig tree with the Temple story? Our author (by the way, which one of the two wrote this chapter? See the preface, page xi: they divided the chapters between them, and then in editing reconciled two independent interpretations) says the withering of the fig tree (reported on Wednesday) is symbolic of the Temple. But the author leaves us with the impression that Jesus created this symbol; in fact, it occurs over and over in Jeremiah

Crossan (my guess) then goes on to clear up some misunderstandings, which are prevalent about the temple incident. He tells us that this is not a statement against sacrifice, that it is not a statement against the priesthood, that it is not a statement against the temple itself. This story has been misused to sow unnecessary division between Christians and Jews, and between Protestants and Romans.

THE MEANING OF BLOOD SACRIFICE
The author says that animal sacrifice for the Jews of Jesus' time and prior was perfectly normal. First, killing (or slaughter) was a prerequisite to eating or feasting, a fact, which we moderns are well shielded from, although the animal rights activists are doing their best to make us aware. Second, good relations are built on the twin concepts of gift and meal. Good relations with a divine being are nurtured with symbolic gifts to the divinity and by sharing a meal with that divinity and fellow creatures of that divinity (a nearly universal concept, not just an ancient Jewish tradition).

We should never attribute suffering by the victim of sacrifice to be an essential part of the gift - a notion that somehow the divine being enjoys or is appeased by the suffering. (But what about the victim's loss of life? No matter how swift or painless the killing is, the victim still has lost its most precious gift.)

We also should never attribute some sense of substitution to the idea of blood sacrifice. The victim is not standing in for us; it is not a scapegoat for us, suffering the loss of its life so that we do not lose our lives to the lightning bolts flung by an angry and avenging god. We will get to the meaning of the death of Jesus in later chapters, but how have these ideas of suffering and substitution colored our pre-Vatican II and post-Vatican II concepts of "temple worship"? Have we projected those concepts back to the Temple Jews to misconstrue their Temple worship, and to misunderstand the "cleansing of the Temple"?

THE AMBIGUITY OF THE HIGH PRIESTHOOD
By the time of Jesus, the high priesthood had been usurped from the original tribal descendants of Aaron by the Maccabean priest-kings, about 160 BCE - 63 BCE. In Jesus' time, first Herod the Great and then the Roman governors appointed the high priests. The house of Hanan (or Annas) ruled for a long time as collaborators with the Roman conquerors. Crossan says "It was quite possible in first century Judea to deny the very validity of the ruling high-priesthood or to be against high-priesthood competition and collaboration without involving any negation of the Jewish priesthood in general or even of the high-priesthood in particular. It was possible to be against a particular high priest and the manner in which he was fulfilling his role without being against the office of high priest itself." Page 41. Question: How does this apply to present day Christianity, and to Roman Christianity in particular? Is it legitimate to oppose the teachings or acts of a person in authority without being unfaithful to the church? Garry Wills in "Papal Sin" asks, "...why do not all the Catholics who disagree with the Pope just get out? ...the question is based on an assumption that is not only challengeable but extremely unhealthy. It assumes that the whole test of Catholicism, the essence of the faith, is submission to the Pope. During long periods of the church's history, that was not the rule - Saint Augustine, for one, would have flunked such a test." Page 6 Question: How does this anti-collaboration message apply to the recently announced "understanding" between the Chinese government and the Vatican, which permits the government to nominate three candidates for bishop, from whom the Pope shall appoint one?

THE AMBIGUITY OF THE TEMPLE
Jeremiah's chapter 7 shows us that conflict over the role of the Temple went back much further than the Roman occupation of Judea. Every institution finds itself in need of refreshing its mission statement, of cleansing itself of those aberrational practices, which divorce itself from its divine mission. In Jesus' time, the injustice of the Roman - high priestly domination system had become institutionalized in the Temple, and Jesus had to "shut down" the Temple symbolically by disrupting the legitimate activities of money changing and sale of sacrificial doves. Immoral and unjust people will not be permitted to hide out in the Temple until they have made a transformation.

(Alternate interpretation: Money changing of Roman denarii into Judean shekels which were pure, and the sale of sacrificial animals had become a Temple monopoly granted by the high priests, for a cut of the profits, of course. Like the refreshment counter in a movie theater, no outside food was allowed, and that which was sold on the Temple premises was outrageously overpriced. Not only was this unfair to other merchants and bankers who would have offered more reasonable rates and prices, it tended to exclude the poor from worshipping. Jesus drove out the thieving sellers and changers who were defiling sacred ground, and he opened up Temple worship to all, regardless of wealth. This interpretation denies the legitimacy of these activities within the Temple, contrary to Crossan's assertions.)

(Alternative interpretation No. 2: Garry Wills in "Papal Sin" says "His 'cleansing' of the Temple was not an attack on peripheral abuses like money exchanges in the forecourt. He is rejecting the validity of sacrifice as an avenue to God ...") page 306

In any case, "God is a God of justice and righteousness, and when worship substitutes for justice, God rejects God's temple - or, for us today, God's church.". Borg/Crossan page 49.

To sum up, Crossan tells us what Jesus' symbolic actions mean: they "proclaim the already present kingdom of God against both the already present Roman imperial power and the already present Jewish high-priestly collaboration... Jerusalem had to be retaken by a nonviolent messiah rather than by a violent revolution, and the temple ritual had to empower justice rather than excuse one from it. What is involved for Jesus is an absolute criticism not only of violent domination, but of any religious collaboration with it. In that criticism, of course, he stands with the prophets of Israel such as Zechariah for the anti-imperial entry against violence and Jeremiah for the anti-temple action against injustice, but he also stands against those forms of Christianity that were used [maybe should say "are being used"] throughout the centuries to support imperial violence and injustice." Page 53.

Mark 11: 18: "And when the chief priests and the scribes heard it, they kept looking for a way to kill him; for they were afraid of him, because the whole crowd was spellbound by his teaching."

Additional discussion:

What symbol in the modern world could be cursed and shrivel to demonstrate the fate of one not producing fruit?

What current acts of imperial domination and religious collaboration most need nonviolent confrontation by followers of Jesus?

Did the high priests have a greater belief (or fear) of Jesus' power to spellbind people than we, his followers, do? How about Pilate (well, that is looking ahead, but what did the representative of the world's most powerful empire have to fear in Jesus?)

If, as Garry Wills argues, Jesus was repudiating the notion of blood sacrifice, why do we have so much language in the Eucharistic service about the body and blood of Christ?

Break time arrived promptly, and our treat bearers cooled our overheating bodies with chocolate cake ala mode and/or a chilled cheesecake. Our overheated spirits, on the other hand, were only stimulated more by energized conversation. Thanks, Mary and David.

After break, we broke into four small groups of four or five members each. We noted that small groups permit more personal sharing of ideas and experiences, They also help people become more familiar with each other. On the other hand, we don't benefit from what is said in other groups (and we wonder why they are laughing so hard). After discussion in the large group, we decided whether to break into small groups or not was to be left to the discretion of the volunteer facilitator for the night.

Despite a pitch encouraging people to share their gifts and talents as facilitator, no one volunteered to lead next week, until David T agreed to serve as a moderator who would guide the discussion using the study questions in the back of the paperback edition of the book, but would not do additional research or prepare notes. The group agreed that was a legitimate and welcome leadership role.

Next week: Tuesday July 31 Borg and Crossan "the Last Week", Chapter 3 "Tuesday"

• Moderator: David T
• Opening prayer: David T
• Treats: Denise and Sheila
• Closing prayer: Judith