For John had said to Herod – “You have no right to be living with your brother’s wife.”
particular behaviors are against the law
there is not a day we are not in violation
each category of law claims independent authority
personal law natural familiar state law
each person ranks laws differently
leading to increasing gaps between people
to apply my favorite law to enforce
on someone who does not recognize it is silly
faced with a foolish literalist raises anger
anger shifts silly to dangerous for all
John may be referencing Leviticus 18:16 where a man (remember this is a patriarchy) is not to sleep with their living brother’s wife. This is the reverse of Deuteronomy 25:5-10 where a man is to take his deceased brother’s wife as his own (Matthew 11:23–33 builds on this with another test from the religious establishment—this time by the Sadducees).
Rabbinic law resolved the conflict by viewing the latter as an exception: Intercourse with one’s sister-in-law is prohibited in every case except that described in Deuteronomy. The midrash even suggests that the two laws were spoken in the same utterance, so that the general rule and the exception would become known at one and the same time. ~JSB251
Herod is not as fortunate as the Rabbis who can hold dissonances together. If this is your first reading of this story, you may be getting edgy as Mark’s telling jumps forward and backward in post-modern fashion. This very jerkiness expresses a kind of urgency. Eventually we will find Herod’s excuses for both keeping John alive and also giving the Red Queen’s order. [Do spend a moment imagining Mark as Lewis Carroll as this Jesus story can be as convoluted and hilarious as a later one about Alice and a Looking Glass.]
This is Mark’s longest, most detailed telling that is not directly about Jesus. When this section is completed it would be instructive to reflect on what would lead the author to put this extended tale where it is, separating the mission of the Twelve, when it could have been as brief as the information about John’s arrest.
For Herod himself had sent and arrested John, and put him in prison, in chains, to please Herodias, the wife of his brother Philip, because Herod had married her.
flashbacks catch us up
now we can see a bit more
bringing relief or fright
pieces fall together differently
with each new process glimpse
shifting decision points
a 180° change in understanding
can appropriately have us affirming
first and last judgments
like a crystal radio
we are always dialing in
doing the best we can to keep up
with late-breaking news
adjusts intimations of what’s next
stories without flashbacks comfort
we always only know what we know
never having to forgive more
for now we recalculate
where we thought we were headed
which moving way we now follow
Herod has dealt with John and can as easily deal with Jesus when he crosses a line or raises a politically sensitive matter. John shamed Herod about his marriage to his half-brother’s wife while Philip (per Mark) or Herod (per Josephus) was still alive. Whatever the brother’s name, this was a direct affront to Leviticus 18:16; 20:21.
We have already heard that the Pharisees and Herodians were conspiring against Jesus. In due time another death will distract from the tenuous legitimacy of Herod’s rule.
In many ways we are hearing the latest transgression G*D warned against when the crowd demanded a king in 1 Samuel 8. Mark has extended a long line of privileged excess—Ahab and Jezebel are here named Herod and Herodias. Whether the king’s wife is a foreigner or a niece, “might makes right”.
Marley’s ghost or Lady Macbeth’s hands can’t be avoided. Herod may have dealt with John’s shaming with a beheading, but the underlying problem of power, privilege and their self-justification will continue to haunt Herod and all who follow. Already the unease has begun before we even get to Herod’s excuse for intentionally doing away with John.
But when Herod heard of him, he said – “The man whom I beheaded – John – he must be risen!”
Marley’s ghost is claimed to be
a bit of undigested beef crumb of cheese
a mustard blob on an underdone potato
disordering Ebenezer’s stomach
John’s ghost is as easily discounted
see resurrection at work
reincarnating at the least a remorse
in the problem of the day
past as prelude to a next future
confuses direct cause and effect
with unintended consequences
leaving us all at sixes and sevens
we are dragged into repeating
past regrets and outright wrongs
with no negotiated settlement in sight
only being caught in yesterday’s loop
We have heard a couple of the rumors regarding Jesus. They associate him with the remembrance of prophets past. There is still power in those remembrances and we do well to hearken unto them in every age.
This is a potential hint about the identity of Jesus that keeps getting hung up on the Son of G*D/child of humans duality. Prophets also walk this line starting as children of humans.
What has been known as the Markan secret, since Jesus keeps telling people and partners not to tell, may end up being clarified by the end of this circular and ambiguous account.
For now, we each are in the midst of multiple story-lines. The Native Grandfather story of two wolves awaiting to see which we will feed is appropriate here. Which of the intersecting stories we live between will we give attention to?
Herod has chosen to continue dealing with the prophet he knows, John. This both empowers and endangers Jesus. When Jesus heard of the arrest of John he began his public engagement and advocacy for the poor and sick, the victims of oppression and conquest. As we embark upon hearing of John’s death, a part of our attention wonders about Jesus’ response to a beheading (didn’t that slip by easily—or did you have a small recoil at simply hearing that said in such an everyday manner?). If there wasn’t a moment of discomfort at bumping into that word you may have been reading too quickly.
Better to deal with John than Elijah—Signifier of Time’s End.
Others again said – “He is Elijah,” and others – “He is a prophet, like one of the great prophets.”
Elijah is expected every year
not like any ancient prophet
whose name hasn’t faded yet
leaving space at the table
makes us familiar if not present
yes this one we know
since we know Elijah stories
it is easy for us to know all stories
as Elijah’s genre stories
in our reality wrestling
and meaning quest continuance
wisdom’s breadth is narrowed
I’ll bet my Elijah interpretation
against your John speculation
any day of the week
The blogosphere of Herod’s time was as busy as the current one. Herod’s responses seem to not be one of a policy-maker but a reactor to the latest news.
You can almost hear echoes of Herod’s Press Secretary daily giving a different explanation of the wonder-working outside of Herod’s purview or control. “Jesus is John revived from death” (again, an intimation of death without detail). “Jesus is Elijah returned as dramatically as he left” (2 Kings 2:11). “Jesus is another of another prophetic school” (how many ancient prophets come to mind and how many of them are women?
None of this prophet talk is sitting well with Herod and those privileged to be in his entourage, part of his posse. Prophets and heads-of-state are in conflict about the future. Prophets see the constraints on abundance resulting from the use of resources to protect the powerful and are advocates for a better tomorrow for everyone disadvantaged by today’s systems. Those in charge of others find themselves constantly using more of tomorrow’s resources to prop up their current standard of living. There is no oil/water interface here, but a stark difference in orientation.
With all this speculation we can sense Herod becoming edgier and edgier. Dissonance is being built up. John is meddling in state politics when he proclaimed against Herod’s intermarriage that consolidated his meager dynasty. Colonialism in any age brings out the necessities required to stay in power. Those who have eyes to see and ears to hear can anticipate Jesus’s arrest and death. Mark doesn’t have to say any more at this point, nor does Jesus.
Now King Herod heard of Jesus; for his name had become well known. People were saying – “John the Baptizer must have risen from the dead, and that is why these miraculous powers are active in him.”
it is most difficult
to go beyond our experience
thought experiments are rare
present knowledge is comfortable
trustworthy loyal controllable
along comes strange news
by definition not good news
to be grabbed by the neck
stuffed into a current category
curiosity satisfied memory wiped
such stasis settles in
each social stratum has theirs
by which we know and find our place
John Jesus Jonah Jeremiah
we got you covered
Markan “sandwiches” or inclusions interrupt themselves as we just read with the sending of Twelve. They also are interrupted by other events such as the woman who bled for twelve years and this episode with Tetrarch Herod Antipas and Baptizer John.
The transition here is smoother as it builds upon the report of the Twelve about the healing they were able to do. In Herod’s terms “miraculous powers” had been wakened.
The exact nature of these countervailing powers was quite up for grabs as a variety of explanations will be forthcoming. This same variety of speculations arise in every time, for nothing is quite as simple as we would like to be able to have our meaning-making desire cared for. Basically, strange things are afoot and this means danger to those who are momentarily powerful and opportunity for those out-of-the-loop.
John, “raised from the dead”? We first met John in Chapter 1 when he was baptizing as a sign of repentant metanoia (1:4). With John’s arrest (1:14) Jesus begins his Proclamation Tour. John’s disciples are following their tradition and become part of the stimuli for a test of Jesus regarding fasting (2:18). John has been under arrest for some time. We’ve practically forgotten about the Baptizer. Now, out of the blue, in the midst of an ecstatic recounting of healing after healing, John is dead?
BANG! It is time to reorient ourselves to a sideways approach to the question of Jesus’ identity and finding out about John.
They drove out many demons, and anointed with oil many who were infirm, and cured them.
from appointed to anointing
evidences growth in trust
with nothing new under the sun
healing gifts are all around
to begin seeing need out there
and a gift to share in here
pushes us into a wilderness
of our own assumptions
need so great gift too small
confuse our tracking skills
running over one another
prodding here tugging there
until we are thoroughly lost
and in a moment’s moment
find ourself with the lost
reclaiming a grand mutual healing
after all these years
this still cannot be explained
how intentional lostness
leads out from wilderness
Hooray! The first part of the work of the Twelve seems to have worked well (authority over “unclean” spirits). Notice that nothing is mentioned about their second task to proclaim a change of hearts and lives.
There are technical terms such as synecdoche and metonymy that indicate one part stands for the whole or closely associated with it—e.g., seeing the tip of a sail just cresting the horizon and calling out, “Ship ho!” Under this rubric you can say one and mean both. But Mark has set them up verses apart as the crust ends of a sandwich holding a dress code and a conditioned leaving process—they are connected but distinguishable.
Working from silence to be able to have a positive response about the proclamation of John and Jesus and themselves (and ourselves?) tends to leave us with an encroaching piety that sees everything in its own light. We have to ask whether the hearts and lives of the Twelve were changed on their journey and healing acts? Given the track-record of the Twelve and events yet to come it seems unlikely.
We can see the Twelve excited about being able to participate in signs of G*D’s presence with them and completely blanking about how to report on the lives of those whose spirit and body were anointed (Messiah-ed). It is exciting to claim the authority of a Messiah without the ongoing work that comes from intentional testing and retreat grounding tomorrow’s present rather than the past’s today.
So they set out, and proclaimed the need of repentance.
we go forth
we go forth
we go forth
we go forth
we go forth
So John went out into the wilderness to proclaim a needed change of hearts and lives. So Jesus follows on John. So follow the Twelve and those in this train of learning about our hearts and lives and witnessing to the power set loose when we are in tune with the freedom to continue or change direction. An extension of this is to see changed hearts and lives partnered to change the heart and relationships within an Institution, State, or Culture.
Going forth is important to solidify the flexibility needed to engage one’s next self, as well as others. This is not a spectator sport or a commentator’s function. To actually work on oneself and invite others to that same work for themselves is prelude and process for a proclamation that holds to its current integrity and openness as well as acknowledging where others are located. This sort of proclamation finds its health in partnering for growth and diversity.
There is an old saying that teaching is learning. Stating change should happen has no correlation to actual change. The process of changing hearts and lives goes well beyond doctrine, dogma, canon. There are no universals or particular creedal language that will get to the heart of the heart. This has been true for the Twelve up to this point. We can hear the frustration of Jesus in this sending forth. It is time for his inner-circle to grow up and that takes some real world experience.
Remember the Twelve includes both Peter and Judas Iscariot. I expect if Mark had remarked on the pairings, these two would be a logical twosome to keep Mark’s penchant for ambiguity going strong. If these two proclaim, you could expect considerable difference in both how and what gets lifted up as a way toward change. Now, imagine you are alternately paired with Peter for a week and Judas for week. What might you learn from their teaching about change?
and if a place does not welcome you, or listen to you, as you go out of it shake off the dust that is on the soles of your feet, as a protest against them.”
messages are written in the sky
dust read while hanging in air
stirred by feet running like the wind
away from deeper wilderness
such signs bear witness
to stuck points breaking apart
at seams and seems
too much holiness on each side
surety brings a quick kicking out
relief to leave such strictures
no one constrained by another
now’s the time or it’s the highway
wherever eyes look dust clouds rise
a divide between yesterday’s ways
and tomorrow’s mirage thin hope
each contraction leaving nothing between
a cloud of witnesses more than only mine
brings questions about leaving
mid-sandal-shake a pause
an ash-cloth return seeking welcome
Mark’s ambiguities can lead to a harder reading than is necessary. “Place” can be read as a city, a synagogue, or one or more persons. If left as a city we remember other cities such as Sodom and Gomorrah just prior to their reported destruction. There a witness against their inhospitality results in their destruction.
All too often we read “witness” in a legal manner wherein we are making a stand for, or against, someone and their behavior. So it is important to remember the purpose of the Twelve—the practice of authority over unclean spirits (presence to those in need of healing).
When we remember the witness to changed lives the Twelve bring through their simple dress and reliance upon bringing forth hospitality/compassion in those they encounter, it is clearer that their witness is “to” others rather than a witness “against” them.
Mann293 notes: “The Greek specifically speaks of a warning to them, not an adjuration against them.” This reminds us that translational issues add to the narrative issues within Mark. With Mark firmly within a canon that freezes some stories at some point in their telling as scripture, there is always a temptation in a religious setting to see oneself as an extension of the Twelve and everyone else an outsider to be witnessed against, shunned, destroyed. This is lazy reading.
“Whenever you go to stay at a house,” he said, “remain there until you leave that place;
all in all providence
is a worthy helpmeet
aiding our meeting others
on mutual ground
willing to push past privilege
to see what might yet emerge
from a cosmic blind date
to place our eggs
in the flimsy basket
of first opportunity
does not usually return
based on trusted return
of value-filled customers
first and foremost surprise
is in the air
beginning with our demon
being driven from its place
of first and foremost
opening space and time
to a serendipitous presence
This is movement material. We sense the lay of the land and where the lines of welcome lead. The easiest way to learn this is an urban immersion among those without shelter. Bonds that can be made are very valuable. Amazing generosity among the invisible is a wonder to behold and receive. (This is not to discount the difficulties of trust and those who would take advantage—there are predatory laity, as well as clergy, who quickly establish a sense of entitlement.)
Either learning on a Vision Quest or re-living an Exodus can lead to engaging people. When carrying no provisions, we are looking for those with an openness to partnership. Hospitality is a good marker for a good partner.
Waetjen124 reminds us that the simplicity of dress helps the Twelve, “identify more closely with the people they are evangelizing, specifically the lower-class masses….Their identification with the poor is to be so intimate that they are to live with them in their homes during the time they are ministering in a particular place.”
There are limits to expectations for hospitality and/or a safe house in the midst of persecution. Some of these are laid out in the Didache:
And concerning the Apostles and Prophets, act thus according to the ordinance of the Gospel. Let every Apostle who comes to you be received as the Lord, but let him not stay more than one day, or if need be a second as well; but if he stay three days, he is a false prophet. And when an Apostle goes forth let him accept nothing but bread till he reach his night’s lodging; but if he ask for money, he is a false prophet. (11:3-6)
but they were to wear sandals, and not to put on a second coat.
connect shoes with
a private savings account
not speeding erratically
laded heavy footed
at 3 MPH
goes a long way
without a retinue
Sandals remind us of our being both in and not of the world. We are separated from the sticky clay of our creation that would hold us back while accumulating dust that reveals our movement.
There are those who would take us back to the basic of clay and dust, as though a “Let there be” didn’t and doesn’t still ring through the air. Mark knows the difficulty of his age and the Twelve are not required to leave all behind to become a cadre of a new creation. The resistance growing against Jesus’ presence will come to the Twelve and a vehicle, sandals, will assist them to move on (see 6:11 on not getting bogged down by proving rightness).
No matter how we walk in the world, its temptation to power (casting out demons) and greed continues to beckon. In John 13 there is a particular recognition that sandals do not keep us from picking up values that would lead us away from a betrayal of new understandings of a journey of theosis or a need for confession when taking easy ways out. A washing of feet is prelude to a commission to love one another as a sign of partnering with Jesus.
The question of being limited to one tunic or shirt or pair of underwear (Waetjen124) has had a variety of suggestions from Arndt and Gingrich identifying two shirts as a “sign of effeminacy” (Bratcher188) to a resistance uniform (Swanson190) or dress code (Myers72) distinct from Roman occupation and signifying dependence upon hospitality of those willing to engage an urgency for a change of heart and a healing of one kind or another.
There are several ways in which people are to go unto their Neighb*r. The details of appearance vary but underlying cultural symbolism of dress and language is the issue of an offering of a choice about abundance to be freely accepted, not coerced. Here the dress emphasizes simplicity and speed up to a point of contact whereupon matters become more complex.