The kingship of Jesus is the subject of Pilate’s interrogation. ‘King of the Jews’ was a messianic title of the descendant of David who would inaugurate the reign of God. The Jewish leaders considered Jesus’ messianic claim blasphemous. The title made political claims that challenged the absolute authority of Roman control. From the perspective of the Roman occupiers, such revolutionary contentions were dangerous. Jesus is asked: ‘Are you the King of the Jews?’ He answers: ‘Yes and No!’ His kingdom is not of this world. It does not belong to it. However, it is in the world. Both the Jewish leaders and the Roman officials had reason to be concerned about Jesus’ claims. Though not of this world, his kingdom would indeed challenge both religious messianic expectations and the political powers of this world.
The whole of chapter 13 in the Gospel of Mark is devoted to a discourse about the future. In the section preceding this week’s passage, Jesus has foretold the destruction of the Temple and the fall of Jerusalem. He has also predicted war on a massive scale and the persecution of his followers. Now, in this passage, Jesus predicts the return of the Son of Man and the fulfilment of the kingdom of God. Why does the gospel include such an extended description of the collapse of the world as it was? Because that’s exactly what was going on around the community of this gospel writer! This gospel is understood to have been written somewhere in the period 70-75 CE. In the year 70 CE the city of Jerusalem was besieged by Roman troops who stormed the city and destroyed it. As a sign of complete disdain for the people of Jerusalem and a mark of overwhelming victory, the Romans burnt and completely destroyed the Temple in the heart of Jerusalem. For the entire Jewish community, this was absolute devastation. The destruction of the Temple surely marked the coming of the end times – the day of judgment and completion of this world. The community gathered around this gospel writer were no less affected. In the midst of this despair and fear, the followers of Jesus are challenged to remember the teachings of the one they follow. This passage is written for them as an encouragement to not give up in the face of what appears to be overwhelming odds. It is a call to hope.
In the gospel, Jesus condemns ostentation. Some men wore religious robes in public, hoping that people would consider them prayerful. Others sought the most important seats in the synagogue or at banquets. Still others made sure that their temple offerings were acknowledged. In contrast to this, Jesus pointed out the offering of a poor widow. She offered the smallest coins in circulation at that time, but she gave out of the generosity of her heart. Jesus spoke of the source of the offering. The wealthy donated from their surplus, what they did not need. The woman gave what she herself needed. Her total giving implied absolute trust in God. The passage that opened with a condemnation of the false piety of the unscrupulous, closes with praise of the genuine piety of the simple.
By the time of Jesus, 613 commandments had grown up surrounding the official biblical law. While all were considered delivered by God to Moses, some were more important than others. The scribe should have understood this. Jesus does not single out any particular law, but endorses the summons that constitutes the Shema, the most significant prayer of the Israelite religion (cf, Deut 6:5). Jesus was asked to identify one commandment, and he offers two. The second is a citation from the Book of Leviticus (19:18). By bringing these admonitions together as he does, Jesus shows that, though not identical, they are interrelated. No one dared challenge Jesus again. What else was there to ask? What other answer could be given?
The account of the healing of a blind man is also a call narrative, for the man interprets Jesus’ words in this way. When he hears that it is Jesus of Nazareth who is passing by him, he identifies Jesus as a descendant of David and the long-awaited one who would fulfil religious and political expectations. When Jesus called for him, he threw his cloak aside, leaving behind the alms he had already collected as well as his life of begging. The man who was blind had eyes of faith and he acted on this faith, publicly proclaiming it. As a consequence of his profession, Jesus tells him that it is this faith that gave him his sight. In his eagerness to respond to Jesus’ call, he had already left everything. Having been cured, he now follows Jesus.
The gospel is filled with misunderstandings, paradoxes and reversals. James and John seek places of prominence in Jesus’ kingdom and Jesus informs them that real prominence is found in service, not in wielding authority over others. The willingness of the sons of Zebedee to accept the cup that Jesus will eventually drink and to be baptised in his baptism is another example of their misunderstanding. They could hardly have imagined the implications of their words. Jesus never denies that he would be prominent in the reign of God. However, whenever he discussed either the reign itself or the role that he will play in it, he always indicated that it was God’s reign and that he had been appointed by God to do God’s work.
The initial exchange between Jesus and the rich man raises the question: Can one gain eternal life, or is it a gift from God? This is an honest and upright man, one who has been observant from his youth, but who realises that there is still something missing in his life. Even the righteous find it difficult to respond to the radical demands of discipleship. Nowhere does Jesus say that wealth is bad. In fact, riches were considered an indication of divine favour and a reward for piety. Jesus is claiming that they can be a diversion from the real goal of life, a hindrance to entrance into the reign of God. Jesus admits that this is a hard saying.
The Pharisees were not asking about the acceptability of divorce; it was permitted by law. Jesus responds to their challenge with one of his own. Without undermining the authority of Moses, he goes beyond the Mosaic tradition to the original intent of God as found in the creation account. In God’s design the couple become one flesh and must not be separated. Later Jesus explains his challenge of the patriarchal understanding of divorce and remarriage. Jesus then makes children the symbol and model of those who would receive and enter the reign of God. The reign of God must be accepted as children might accept a gift. Furthermore, it must also be entered with the un-self-consciousness of children.
The gospel is a collection of pronouncements of Jesus on the topics of acceptance, hospitality and scandal. Like Joshua in the first reading, John challenges someone who is not a member of the close knit group of disciples, but who presumes to perform the marvels that they have been commissioned to perform. Jesus responds that this man is not an enemy, nor do his exorcisms undermine Jesus’ ministry. Jesus continues to justify works of mercy performed in his name. They are commendable and will be highly rewarded regardless of how insignificant they may appear to be. Jesus then warns against giving scandal. Those who cause Christians to sin will be severely punished.
Away from the crowds, Jesus identifies himself as the mysterious Son of Man and predicts his passion, death and resurrection. The disciples did not grasp the meaning of Jesus’ words, and they engaged in a heated discussion about status within the community. Jesus had just admitted his ultimate vulnerability, and they were quarrelling about rank. Jesus seized the moment to teach an important lesson: following his own example, those who would be first must be willing to be last. In the world of Jesus’ time, neither servants nor children had any legal rights or social status. Jesus turns the social ranking system upside down. Those who hold the highest positions within the community must be willing to take the lowest place and be the servants of all. He offers himself as an example of one who empties himself for the sake of others.