I suspect this is a biblical story
that we are familiar with without really knowing too much about it, we might
know the name Salome, of have some notion of scarves, and the platter is a
memorable object, and a vivid reminder of the brutality in this story. As we
hear it this morning you may have noticed the platter and the violence was
defiantly in the text, but the scarves and the implicit sexuality are perhaps
less present. The aspects of this story that are well known culturally are
important to sort out from what is actually in the Gospel. This is also a
Gospel story where Jesus is not the main focus. Of course there are connections
to Jesus and maybe even foreshadowing—but this is not a story about
Jesus. This is one of those biblical texts that is oddly familiar, but as we
read it and hear it, I suspect it is also a little strange. The narrative order
is strange, the depiction of the reluctant leader Herod is strange, the roles
of women are strange, and the dinner party that ends in a beheading is strange.
I want to take a moment to explore those different strange things in order to
better understand this familiar text and to try to figure out what is the
Gospel message for us amidst all the strangeness and beheading.
One of the ways in which it is strange
is that it begins with the ending. Perhaps in an effort to connect this story
to Jesus, Mark begins with people telling Herod that Jesus might be the risen
again John the Baptist. The mention that John is dead is the first we have
heard of it. Previously we read in Mark that John had been imprisoned. So it is
an opportunity for Mark to tell the story. The fact that this story begins with
us knowing what happened, and knowing the connection that Herod (and Mark)
understand between John and Jesus gives us some kind of clue about how we are
supposed to understand it. I think it indicates that we are supposed to see the
end result, the beheading as an escalation in the level of violence that might
come for Jesus. It is a foreshadowing of what we also already know happened. It
also foreshadows the idea of resurrection. Herod thinks that Jesus is the
resurrected John. This is of course a very limited understanding of
resurrection, and knowing as we know the type of resurrection that Jesus
eventually has, this one is a very base, or earthly idea of resurrection. For
Herod, one trouble maker has become another trouble maker. One political enemy
has become another political enemy. Though it may be odd for us to hear this
story with the end at the beginning, and though Mark offers no spoiler alerts,
I think the strangeness of this aspect is just an attempt by Mark to connect it
to the larger story. The real strangeness it is trying to smooth out is that
this is a story that has implications for Jesus’
story, but is not directly about Jesus.
Of course this passage has many
other ways of being strange. Herod’s role in this story is
strange. He seems to have a lot of fear in this story. He initially imprisons
John after John goes around telling people that Herod’s marriage is not lawful. Herod married his older
half-brother’s wife. Scholars think that
the legal problem that John had with this marriage was not that it was his
brother’s ex-wife, but that Herod and
Herodias had had an affair before they were married. When she was still married
to his half-brother. Political sex scandals are nothing new. And this seems
pretty tame compared to the scandals we have these days. John’s threat to Herod is as a political leader. John’s criticism of Herod is along Jewish law lines, but seen
more broadly it spoke to the morally corrupt political leaders of the time, and
called them out for it. The gospel explains to us that “Herod feared John, knowing that he was a righteous and holy
man, and he protected him. When Herod head him, he was greatly perplexed; and
yet he liked to listen to him.” The portrait of Herod that
Mark paints is rather complex. Herod obviously doesn’t understand John’s preaching or he objections
to Herod’s rule, but he is still
fascinated by him. There is a way in which this description of Herod does not
sound unlike some of our political leaders. There is something familiar to me
in the fascination and in the not being able to understand what the big deal is
with their moral failing. Mark paints a picture of Herod where even though he
is ultimately responsible for what happens to John, he also resisted all along
the way. Historians who were accounting Jewish history at that time disagree
with this reluctant killer Herod and instead explain that Herod feared John’s threat to his power. So Mark either has some inside
knowledge that historians missed, or he wants to portray the political leaders
of the day as bad guys, but also as bad guys who recognize the righteousness
and holiness of John and Jesus.
Herod’s
odd role as the not-so-bad-guy who has to honor his oaths is indeed strange,
but so too is the role of the women in this story. The women are angry,
vengeful, manipulative and blood thirsty in this story. All of these worst
attributes of humanity are ascribed to women. Herodias and her un-named
daughter do not seem to have the same fear and respect of John that Herod does.
Herodias has a grudge and wants to kill him—but
she is prevented from doing this because of Herod’s
fear. We understand that women of this time, even the wives of political
leaders were oppressed. And as an oppressed group they don't have a lot of
agency. Herodias cannot kill John. She cannot even convince her husband to do
so to defend her honor. But she can use the system as best she can to get what
she wants. The idea that the daughter's dance was sexual is something we might
know culturally, but is not something that is in the text. I can see how
people, in trying to understand how and why Herod was so charmed by the dance
that he would have been willing to give up half his kingdom might assume that
it had something to do with a very sensual dance. But one clue we have in Mark
that this is not what he means is that the word he uses for girl refers to a
very young girl. The other time Mark uses this word for girl it is to refer to
a six year old. And though we have an over sexualized culture, I think Herod
was just really proud and impressed with the dancing. Not because it was
sexual, but because it was a little kid in front of a large crowd. It probably
didn't hurt that he had been drinking. The roles of women are strange, and it
is strange that Mark wants to pin so much of the blame on them. They are
certainly the scapegoats in this story.
Perhaps the strangest thing in this
story and the thing most important to talk about is the dinner itself. The
dinner is a banquet that Herod gives himself in honor of his birthday. Herod
invites those most loyal to him, his courtiers, his officers and the high
ranking leaders of Galilee. These people are the powerful elite, the corrupt
leaders. His banquet had fine food, fancy wine, and dancing. But it culminates
in something dark, creepy and strange. It culminates with John's head on a
platter. The meal language makes this especially dark. It is interesting to see
this meal in the context of what else is going on in the Gospel of Mark.
Preceding this story is the one we heard last week, Jesus is rejected in his
hometown, he says prophets are never honored in their hometown, and he sends
his disciples out. THe story immediately following this one is where Jesus feed
5,000 people in the wilderness with only five loaves and two fish. The context
illustrates two clear things: first of all the rejection that Jesus faced in
his hometown has been taken up a notch. This story shows the followers of Jesus
that they will face a very violent world if they choose to go out and preach to
people about Jesus. The danger they will put themselves in is real. And part of
this is because the power that they will be talking about will be very
threatening to the established political leaders. And the second thing we learn
from this context is that this encounter should be seen as a meal. At Herod's
meal the corrupt members of his courts are present. At Jesus' feeding of the 5,000
there is a great crowd. They have been listening to Jesus' teaching and now it
is late and they are hungry. At Herod's meal there was plenty of food to show
his wealth and power. At Jesus' meal there was very little food, but every one
had enough. At the end of Herod's meal they have John the Baptist’s head on a platter. At the end of Jesus' there is more
than enough scraps and broken pieces of bread and fish to fill twelve baskets.
There is another meal here that we
are invited to consider too. It is our Eucharistic meal which we are about to
share. Our meal will indeed have Body and Blood in it, but the Body and Blood
we share are not the spoils of victory. The do not show us the defeat of a
political enemy. Rather they show us that Jesus lives on through and with us.
It binds us together as the Body of Christ. Our body and blood remind us of
Jesus' last meal with his friends. It reminds us of our new life as a
community. It does remind us of Jesus' death, but we are also assured of his
resurrection and ascension. Though we are not fed very much, we are filled with
God's love for us, Jesus' life given for us and the spirit's persistent
presence pushing us every so slightly towards the good. That's the good news that
we are filled with in the Eucharist. God is with us. God's presence with us can
feel quiet until we look around for the space and realize that we should fill
it. Our God is a God who opens up doors to us, but it is we (with God's help)
who have to see the thing and walk through.
This is the part of the Body of
Christ that is a challenge to us every week. We are transformed, but as such we
are (as a group) given the challenge to go out and do that work God gives us to
do. As the deacon, I get the special role of dismissing God's people, and
sending us out into the world. If we
have done our job right here, we have worshiped and praised God, and we have
given everyone some sense of God's quiet presence in their life, offering them
some open doors. As the deacon this week, and thinking particularly about the
role of the deacon as bridging the church to the rest of the world, I am
interested in how this week's general convention (where our priest in charge
was for a few days this week) how the issues of the church relate to the issues
in our larger society. At General Convention there were steps to re-think the Episcopal
Church Center at a time when the church is much smaller than it once was, and
much more economically compromised, and there is the new liturgy to affirm life
long commitments, which will be used starting in Advent of this year to affirm
gay relationships even in states where there is not yet gay marriage if the
bishop of that diocese approves. The Episcopal Church is dealing with the
economy and gay marriage, we are a church that is related to the issues of the
day. As a church we have seen the open doors available to us, and with God's
abiding love, have decided to take some steps into the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.