It just ain’t happening ... (Part 2 - of 12) ... faithfulness, wisdom, & prayer...when the miracles don’t come. Mark ch9v14-29 (to open in a new window, hold control down as you click the link)
So, recapping, when they first see Jesus coming down the
mountain, his disciples have come to a point
of not being able to do a particular miracle which Jesus had given them
authority to do. Jesus (presumably, loudly & with feeling) identifies the
cause “How unbelieving you people are! How long must I stay with you? How long
do I have to put up with you?”(v19 ), and goes about exercising his own
faithfulness & speaking/acting in such a way as to help, provoke, &
grow that faithfulness in others.
It looks like Jesus’
disciples couldn’t do it, they all agreed that they couldn’t, yet he does it, & then explains the
situation further, privately, with: “This kind only comes out by prayer”. Jesus
thereby further interprets his capacity as linked to (his?) prayer, and thus
their lack of capacity as linked to their lack of prayer. Mark’s story however,
doesn’t give us very much indication of where Jesus prayed. Where had he been praying?
One answer is to say that the man had actually “prayed” by asking Jesus for help, and that the disciples had the same option open to them[1]. The logic behind this answer is that since Jesus is the eternal son of God, any request of him could technically come under the title of “prayer”. Since there doesn’t appear to be any other mention of prayer in this pericope, that seems to be the only outcome left to us. This doesn’t need to be gainsaid, but may not be the message that Mark had in mind. If in fact Jesus was living as a true Son of Adam (or Second Adam, as the Apostle Paul says), in a way that any who are his true disciples could; and if Jesus really had given them his authority to drive out all unclean spirits, the questions still remain: How did they get to the place where they are asking “Why couldn’t we drive it out?” And, “Where (at least, at what point in the story) had he, (or others), been praying (or not)?”
One answer is to say that the man had actually “prayed” by asking Jesus for help, and that the disciples had the same option open to them[1]. The logic behind this answer is that since Jesus is the eternal son of God, any request of him could technically come under the title of “prayer”. Since there doesn’t appear to be any other mention of prayer in this pericope, that seems to be the only outcome left to us. This doesn’t need to be gainsaid, but may not be the message that Mark had in mind. If in fact Jesus was living as a true Son of Adam (or Second Adam, as the Apostle Paul says), in a way that any who are his true disciples could; and if Jesus really had given them his authority to drive out all unclean spirits, the questions still remain: How did they get to the place where they are asking “Why couldn’t we drive it out?” And, “Where (at least, at what point in the story) had he, (or others), been praying (or not)?”
The
(unclean) spirit of the truth/relationship-is-static-&-best-dealt-with-as-a-principle
mindset claims for itself many people, which Christ would claim for himself.
God (in Christ) can keep us wherever we are, and those who are truly with him
are ever moving on. But within the general mindset of truth/relationship-is-static-&-best-dealt-with-as-a-principle
thinking there seems to be a propensity to itemize, to look for the
mathematical formula, to seek out the scientific law or principles.[2]
Then it tends to see those particulars (from which it drew the formula), as
simply a token or outworking of the formula or principle. Thus it is in danger
of replacing a story with a set of doctrines or principles, all of which may
have been in fact in the mind of the author, but which do not do the same job
as the story did, when told by the author. Jesus’ (and as I hope we shall also
see, Mark’s) stories did the job of entertaining, catching people’s interest,
sieving, dividing the listeners, piquing their interest, reeling them back to
him, giving him cover from his adversaries, making his teaching memorable,
& stitching his truths to the stuff of everyday life, etc. The principles
derived from the content of the story might in fact do none of the above. It is
hard for the truth/relationship-is-static-&-best-dealt-with-as-a-principle mindset
to see this or appreciate Jesus’ stories (and actions) this way, because of our
(yes, I include myself commonly in this mindset) prior commitment to gaining
principles, rather than listening to our Lord. We want it in our way (not so much in the way he wants to give
it to us), sometimes so insistently that we will not have ever read even one
gospel through in a sitting, or will not have heard one gospel told through in
a night at a home group designed to study the bible. This leaves us with our
set of received “truths” (by which we can mean our authorized set of doctrines,
or imprimatur-ed principles, or
cherished insights), which can have the effect of saving us the effort of
looking & listening further. It’s
looking for principles. It still doesn’t “see” through stories which
are, in this truth/relationship-is-static-&-best-dealt-with-as-a-principle
mindset, reserved for children at one end of life, “novels” read in the
compartment of our “private life”, or old people in retirement at the other end
of life. Thus Matthew Henry, a devoted follower of the Lord Jesus, in
commenting on Mark 9:29 in it’s context says: “The disciples must not think to
do their work always with a like ease, some services call them to take more than
ordinary pains but Christ can do that with a word's speaking, which they must
prevail for the doing of by prayer
and fasting[3]”
- and who would differ with this? How true, timely too for me to be reminded of
it, but it stays a sterile principle.
By this insight, I am not drawn into praying & fasting. This mindset has
been looking for principles, and it sees them. It has a conception of Christ as
“the eternal word” but it does not, through an appreciation of the dimension of
story, have the impetus to look back
to see a puzzle, a game, or a hidden thing (meant to be hidden and then
uncovered, though not as a jack-in-the-box; rather, like “sardine hide-and-seek[4]”
it is meant to quietly & simply call away into hidden-ness all who find
“it”). So this mindset does not allow for the process involved in this eternal word (and thus his followers)
growing, learning obedience through suffering. It forgets that Jesus prayed,
that he was training them, wooing them, developing a desire in them for prayer,
and modelling what he called them to follow them in. It’s insights (do not have
to, but can tend to) make a divorce between the Christ who “speaks”, and we who
must “prevail .. by prayer & fasting”. So, the truth/relationship-is-static-&-best-dealt-with-as-a-principle mindset doesn’t look further in Mark’s story at Christ’s prayer
& fasting, nor can it even “see” some instances, where it was hinted at, or
shown, rather than explicitly “told”.
Interestingly, there are all three: explicit references, implicit references, & hints in Mark’s story before this pericope, that can lead us to 'see'
Jesus "in prayer” . So, we need a way to
view Mark’s writing, in order to provide us with more impetus to take this step
to look further afield for answers that may (purposely) not be (at first)
spelled out, but more hinted at.
[1]Max Lucado, “He Still Moves Stones”, Dallas, Texas: Word Publishing, 1993.&
http://oabchurchconnect.wordpress.com/2013/03/15/the-doubters-prayer
[2] This is hard for children
to do, because it presupposes a certain degree of development & training of
the mind, stories on the other hand can be heard gladly by children & yet
give their treasures to trained minds too, if they are awake to them & look
for them.
[4] A game children play, where
one is chosen to be “it” (or “in”), & secretly goes & hides. The others
after a set time go to look for “it”, and when they find “it” they hide with
“it”, etc. until every one has found “it”. The last one to find “it”, in turn
becomes “it” for the next game of “Sardine-hide’n’seek”.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for adding to the conversation...