| TEXTS that reference ta himatia, the robe or cloak | BRIEF COMMENTARY |
| Mark 2:21; referring to an old garment…
"No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old garment (ejpiV iJmavtion palaiovn); otherwise, the patch pulls away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear is made. |
Jesus thus repudiated the "old fabric" of social and political order in Judaea, the fundamental interconnection between family and halakic community. The "way of Jesus" (his halakah) is the "new fabric" of the reign of God which will define the new family and the way of discipleship. |
| Mark 5:27-30; healing the woman with a haemorrhage.
She had heard about Jesus, and came up behind him in the crowd and touched
his cloak (tou' iJmativou aujtou'), for she said,
"If I but touch his clothes (tw'n iJmativwn aujtou'),
I will be made well." Immediately her hemorrhage stopped; and she
felt in her body that she was healed of her disease.
|
Begins a series of two healings in which the garment of Jesus is the
narrative focus for faith and healing.
|
| Mark 6: 56; healing in the villages…
And wherever he went, into villages or cities or farms, they laid the
sick in the marketplaces, and begged him that they might touch even the
fringe of his cloak (tou' iJmativou aujtou');
and all who touched it were healed.
|
The robe is a key symbol in the teaching about entry into "the way" through
faith.
|
| Mark 9:2 - 4: the appearance of Jesus in a white robe at the
transfiguration…
Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led
them up a high mountain apart, by themselves. And he was transfigured before
them, and his clothes (kaiV taV iJmavtia aujtou')
became dazzling white, such as no one on earth could bleach them.
|
A bridging theme: this scene recalls the "man in glorified
clothing" of Daniel 10:5ff., in a narrative, apocalyptic moment- a vision of the inner circle
of disciples, Peter, James and John.
The white robe is a symbol of matrydom
|
| Mark 10:50; blind Bartimaeus casts off his cloak to follow Jesus
…
So throwing off his cloak (toV iJmavtion aujtou'), he sprang up and came to Jesus. |
A new theme begins: new motif. Here faith is shown as decisive action to throw off the old ways and
to enter the new way. This represents the key to discipleship and
the risk-taking that the disciples later refuse to adopt.
|
| Mark 11: 7-8; clothes cast on the colt or on the ground by the
people on the road to Jerusalem…
Then they brought the colt to Jesus and threw their cloaks (taV iJmavtia aujtw'n) on it; and he sat on it. Many people spread their cloaks (taV iJmavtia aujtw'n)
on the road, and others spread leafy branches that they had cut in the
fields.
|
Where a single man cast off his cloak, now crowds do the same….
|
| Mark 13: 14 - 16; left behind by "the one in the field"
at the time of war...
"But when you see the desolating sacrilege set up where it ought not
to be (let the reader understand), then those in Judea must flee to the
mountains; the one on the housetop must not go down or enter the
house to take anything away; the one in the field must not turn back
to get a cloak (toV iJmavtion aujtou'.) |
The narrative and its setting is apocalyptic. "The desolating
sacrilege" refers to Daniel 11:31, 12:11, and, using the tradition of Jeremiah
21, is applied to the context of the Roman siege of Jerusalem (66 -
70 CE). Mark’s Jesus calls for the casting aside of the old order as a
lost cause (symbolised by fleeing the city, not returning to "the house"
and leaving the fabric of the old order behind).
The exhortation is to abandon the old order. Does this justify the flight to Pella by Jerusalem Christians, c. 70CE? |
| Mark [15:17 - 19] 15:20, 24; Jesus’ clothes become the booty
of soldiers…
[17 And they clothed him in a purple (kaiV ejndiduvskousin aujtoVn porfuvran); and after twisting some thorns into a crown, they put it on him. 18 And they began saluting him, "Hail, King of the Jews!" 19 They struck his head with a reed, spat upon him, and knelt down in homage to him.] 20 After mocking him, they stripped him of the purple and put his own clothes (taV iJmavtia aujtou') on him. Then they led him out to crucify him. . . . 24 And they crucified him, and divided his clothes (taV iJmavtia aujtou') among them, casting lots to decide what each should take. |
[Note: the incident of the "purple robe" does not carry the word ‘robe’
in Greek, as the clause, kaiV ejndiduvskousin aujtoVn
porfuvran - "and they clothed him in purple" - is used, to signify
royal status.] note the position of the robe-
All seems lost. |
| Mark 14: 51-52; a young man fleeing from the garden.
A certain young man was following him, wearing nothing but a linen cloth
(Gk. peribeblhmevno" sindovna ejpiV gumnou',)
They caught hold of him, 52 but he left the linen cloth (thVn
sindovna) …
|
There is a narrative crisis in the story of discipleship, for all hope seems to have fallen away in betrayal or shame. Note the double meaning of sindona, as the cloth worn over a naked body at night, or the cloth of fine linen in which dead bodies are wrapped. (see Strong s.v. 4616, sindona). Sindona carries narrative weight in prefiguring the graves clothes of Jesus; and of being left behind as the young man flees, naked. The naked flight and the fallen linen cloth symbolise the betrayal / shame of the community of male disciples, who flee and are eventually absent from the crucifixion scene, "saving life but losing it" . |
| Mark 15:46; Joseph of Arimathea (ironically, "himself waiting
expectantly for the reign of God" v. 43), wraps Jesus’ body in a linen
cloth...
Then Joseph bought a linen cloth, and taking down the body, wrapped
it in the linen cloth, (Gk kaiV ajgoravsa" sindovna
kaqelwVn aujtoVn ejneivlhsen th'/ sindovni … ) He then rolled a
stone against the door of the tomb.
|
The motif of the discarded sindona, the cloth of betrayal / shame, re-appears as the cloth borne by Joseph in his concern to remove shame from the Sabbath. Joseph’s concern in his approach to Pilate is to avoid polluting the Sabbath. It is not a disciple’s act of compassion but the last word of a member of the Sanhedrin in putting Jesus away. There is no decent burial: Joseph covers the offending presence, as a lord of the Sabbath disposing of the "Lord of the Sabbath", in a final triumph of the authorities. The rolling of the stone closes the story. Like the narrative moment in which the robe is divided among the executioners, a member of the Sanhedrin causes the tomb to be closed. The act of finality at the cross is repeated in the entombment. In a scandalous reversal of social order, women are the remaining disciples of witness. |
| Mark 16:5 - 8; a young man at the tomb, clothed in a long, white
robe...
As they entered the tomb, they saw a young man, dressed in a white robe
(Gk. stolhVn leukhvn), sitting on the right side;
and they were alarmed. But he said to them, "Do not be alarmed; you are
looking for Jesus of Nazareth, who was crucified. He has been raised; he
is not here. Look, there is the place they laid him. But go, tell
his disciples and Peter that he is going ahead of you to Galilee; there
you will see him, just as he told you."
|
The young man parallels the young man naked in the garden but now the
figure appears at the tomb dressed in white, and a new word, stolhv,
stolay,
is used for the garment- which is described as white, a symbol of martyrdom.
The image of the sindona (the cloth of shame / betrayal ) is thus transformed: the one "saving life but losing it" is replaced by the one "losing life but saving it".
|
|
THE NARRATIVE OF THE ROBE
Use of The Garment (taV iJmavtia, ta himatia) as a Significant Symbol in Mark, Concerning The Way of Jesus. © In the Gospel of Mark there is a series of references to garments, the robe or cloak, the linen cloth, the long, flowing robe, that have a narrative, symbolic value of great importance to understanding the Gospel and the Evangelist’s teaching concerning the way of Jesus. In this, the robe is a key symbol with multiple layers of meaning. The first such usage is in Mark 2:21, in reference to inappropriately patching of an old garment with unshrunken cloth. The next two instances occur in healing stories, in which the robe provides a positive, narrative focus for healing those who would touch Jesus’ clothing. In the fourth and subsequent instances the robe has a negative value of a thing being disregarded, as the garment is successively. . . · thrown away by Bartimaeus (Mark 10:50); · cast on the colt and on the ground by the people on the road to Jerusalem (Mark 11:7-8); · left behind by "the one in the field" at the time of war (Mark 13:16); and finally, · stripped from Jesus and divided as booty by the soldiers at the crucifixion, as Jesus ends up naked and crucified (Mark 15:20, 24). Following the sequential use of the robe in Mark, as a narrative symbol, makes for an enlightening approach to the Gospel. In the study that follows, the narrative usage is shown to open up an interpretation of the ministry and teachings of Jesus concerning the way of discipleship (the halakah of Jesus). Jesus considers a patch up job on the socio-political fabric of Israel "No one sews a piece of unshrunk cloth on an old cloak; otherwise, the patch pulls away from it, the new from the old, and a worse tear is made. (Mk. 2:21 NRSV) In using the metaphor of patching an old garment with unshrunken or new cloth, Mark’s Jesus repudiates the "old fabric" of social, religious and political order in Judaea, comparing it to an old, worn garment, thus renouncing the socio-religious fabric of his time and attempts to correct it with "new" or unshrunken cloth.1 The criticism in Mark 1:27, that questions "the new teaching"2 of Jesus is reversed here, criticising the prevailing, communal halakah, the religious way or the fabric of religious and social customs, in which there is a fundamental interconnection between family and the halakic community. This is described as torn, in need of repair. Reforms that look novel but are still of the old order, such as the Pharisaic reforms, are typified as "old cloth". The way of Jesus (his halakah) is, by inference, the right cloth to be applied. It is "the pre-shrunken, tested, new fabric" of the reign of God which will define the new family and the way of discipleship in radical social practice, as a re-creation, a new fabric that will prevail. This contrasts with the "old fabric" of the Pharisaic holiness code, which risks making a greater tear in the social fabric if the wrong patch is applied.3 As the Gospel unfolds, what it means to be of "shrunken cloth" will emerge along with a critical understanding of "the old fabric".4 The way of Jesus may appear novel and subject to derision (Mk. 1:27) but the "new teaching" will be seen to have been processed or "tested" in a distinct way, the way of the Cross. Its application will transform the whole cloth. The robe, will be a key metaphor in unfolding that meaning, in relation both to faith and to action as definitive aspects of discipleship. Mark 2:21 sets the reference points, in which the old order is described as worn and in need of patching. If the old fabric is to be patched, the patch itself must be of a special nature. The narrative identifies this in a series of healings, demonstrating a reversal of power, a challenge to social privilege and a need for repair of the old, "torn and worn" way. From Mark 14:24 onwards, the new, tested fabric is defined in terms of the social practice of nonviolent love, the heart of radical discipleship in the way of Jesus, the way of the Cross. Paradoxically, this new way does not merely patch the old cloth but transforms it. In the parallel metaphor of Mark 2:22, the new wine in new wine skins is transformed and "poured out for many." (Mark 14:24) A series of healings: identifying the need for repair and a special patch The garment of Jesus provides the narrative focus for faith and healing in which significant aspects of the old fabric and the new are disclosed. In each of the healing stories, it is the action of touching Jesus’ robe, in faith, that focuses the healing event. This is seen firstly, in Mark 5:27-30, the story of Jesus healing the woman with a hemorrhage, where the role of faith of one barred by negative barriers of distinction from participating fully in the fabric of the old order, overturns expectations of custom and cult. As an act of healing it repudiates the old order, revealing aspects of the way of Jesus and the reign of God in which oppressive barriers of distinction are overcome. Faith is the key to the healing power of the new community, and neither status nor the old way itself matters. In this story, a preference is shown for support in healing the dispossessed and oppressed person so that the whole fabric is repaired. The fact that religious order under the Law (Torah), custom and politics of Judaea brought a cost in human terms is addressed. The narrative teaches us to recognise the worn and torn part of the socio-religious fabric as being nation-wide; this one case is an example of wider concerns. In Mark 6:56, the instance of the lone woman of Mark 5:27-30, is significantly multiplied in the many healings in the villages, cities and farms. And wherever he went, into
villages or cities or farms, they laid the sick in the marketplaces,
and begged him that they might touch even the fringe of his robe; and
all who touched it were healed. (Mark 6:56)
Again, the robe is a key symbol in the teaching about entry into the way through faith. The robe is the focus of faith and the action takes place outside the traditional centre, in the market places and not in Jerusalem, the centre of power of the old fabric. As the people recognise a new fabric of power, they define the place of the new fabric with Jesus as the centre. This reversal of power is dramatically demonstrated in Mark 5: 21-34, in Jesus’ encounter with two daughters of Israel, the woman with the hemorrhage and with the daughter of Jairus, the Archon. Before continuing with the describing the role of the robe in Mark’s Gospel, it is worth while taking a side step to look closely at Mark 5: 21-34, the healing of the woman with a hemorrhage and the associated story of the healing of Jairus’ daughter. For these stories provide a stinging critique of the dominant order, the old fabric and the unshrunken patch cloth, and highlight the radical inclusivity of Jesus and the reign of God. What follows provides a commentary on two daughters of Israel, and makes a seamless application of the text to our own times and to questions of inclusivity and application of codes of holiness and barriers of distinction. Excursus: Tears in the fabric- a story of two daughters of Israel 5 Mark has many interlocking motifs and this one is important in that it links to these two healings a motif of "sleep" and "resurrection" that links again with the narrative of the robe in Mark 14:51-52, the account of sleeping disciples in the garden of Gethsemane and also at Mark 16, where women are the significant bearers of evangelical witness. In Mark 5:21-34, The Evangelist presents two stories in an instructive unit, in which the story of the woman with a hemorrhage, is imbedded in the story of Jairus' daughter. Thus:- vv. 21 - 24a Jesus returns to "Jewish" territory, "the other side."
This locates the scene among the Jewish people. Jairus appeals to Jesus to heal his daughter. Jesus goes with him. vv. 24b - 34 The story of the woman with the hemorrhage breaks into the narrative; a need is identified and a power reversal is illustrated in a striking reversal of priorities; vv. 35 - 43 News comes of the death of Jairus’ daughter; Jesus heals Jairus' daughter. This story of two Jewish women, one mature and the other a young maiden, shows Jesus' ministry as inclusive yet giving priority to the underprivileged, to the poor and the outcasts, to those dispossessed and oppressed by Law, custom and status. Each story is meant to interpret the other. Its focus on women and menstruation is significant, as the law relating to blood flow (Leviticus 15:19-30) effectively kept women out of cultic religious life and isolated them within their families. The praxis of Jesus that these stories uncover, speaks for the radical inclusivity of women and subverts Levitical practice. It places compassion and faith above concerns for Law and ritual purity. In the context of the early church, of the Evangelist's time, it provides instruction for Jewish concerns regarding Law and purity in face of participation of women in the life of the church. It points to changes necessary to include those rendered outcasts by the Law. In our time, it points to the role of faith and not of law in determining who is counted "inside" and who is "outside" the realm of God. In fact, it shows that the very ones who assume to be "inside" are the last to be included. These are stories of subversion and of inclusivity, that upset the norms of religious acceptance. They are significant texts of liberation in our time. The Synoptic traditions show women as key figures in the ministry of Jesus and in the early life of the church. Women are always in service, in the background in many cases. However, they are significant witnesses to the faith, at the crucifixion and on Easter Day, where the male disciples are absent. Paul also shows several women as key persons in the life of the church. The participation of women was a major issue for early, Jewish Christians, as was the question of inclusivity of Gentiles. Levitical Law effectively ostracised women from family and religious life for eight days after any bleeding episode. There was not a similar concern among Gentiles but the presence of Gentile Christians themselves brought additional concern for the Jewish Christians. Where the early, Jewish Christians had to face questions of Law, relating to diet, circumcision, inclusivity and cultic practice, the Evangelist marks the priority of faith in determining inclusive practice. Discernment in terms of gender, class, race and social status are put aside where faith is involved. In these two stories, the faith of Jairus and the unnamed woman represent two ends of the social scale. They stand in marked contrast to each other. Jairus, as head of his household and as Archon, or ruler in his synagogue, speaks on his daughter's behalf and on behalf of his social group or community. He acts and speaks from a position of power and privilege. The woman is nameless and she is alone and speaks only for her daughter. Jairus stands out in the crowd, as a leader, the woman is hidden and unknown in the crowd. She is truly an unprivileged outcast, who acts and speaks from a position of powerlessness. Looking a little more closely to the story, we find Jairus, the Archon, approaching Jesus and exhorting him to heal his dying daughter. Jairus' manner is two sided. He honours Jesus, or flatters him by falling at his feet, yet he also lays a clear expectation upon Jesus to carry through an expected process. He says, "Come, lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well, and live." Jairus is clearly acting out of an assumed position of power, as a man accustomed to control. Jesus says nothing and, with a compliance that seems to honour the status of Jairus, he goes with the Archon and we are left expecting that the process will be carried out as requested. Jesus' simple resolve, to go with Jairus, quickly gets diverted. In an unexpected turn of events a woman enters the scene. She is anonymous in the crowd and seeks Jesus from a place of anonymity. We are told a great deal about her condition. She has had a hemorrhage for twelve years, has spent all her money on physicians and her health is worsening. She reaches out to touch Jesus, from behind, believing that touching his robe, will make her well. She is acting out of faith. It is important to understand this woman's position, here. Apart from having a chronic illness, having a hemorrhage for twelve years would have isolated her from her family and the religious life for all of that time (see Lev. 15:19-30). The realities of following the law of Moses are harshly illustrated here. Any person she touched would be made to share her unclean state. She was an outsider among the insiders! She was ritually unclean as well as unhealthy. In a Jewish audience, this story would have raised questions about Jesus' own purity, through contact with the woman (see Lam. 4:14-15). That is why many key words in the story carry the nuance of touch and of loss of virtue. When a devout Jewish audience heard this story, the people would have been scandalised. Immediate concern would have been raised over purity issues, honour and social status. However, at the very moment the woman makes contact with Jesus, these dynamics are reversed. Her body is healed. Her body is the centre of our focus. This is the opposite of what would be expected, as Jesus should have contracted her impurity through contact with her and tradition placed him in the place of concern, of focus and of power. In fact, in Mk 5:30, we are told that the power (or virtue)6 has been transferred to her. This is in direct opposition to expectations sustained under the Law (Lev. 15:19-30), which held that a man thus touched by a menstruating or hemorrhaging woman, was defiled. Here Mark signals a social reversal of great magnitude. The woman is the one who has virtue or an enabling power, and this is given to her by her faith. In this way, key elements of Levitical Law are scandalised and subverted by a new definition of virtue by faith. We are not dealing with some mystical energy or "power" leaving Jesus, like discharging an electrical charge via a human lightning rod. The concern is for Jesus' loss of ritual purity or virtue under the Law, which is an essential concern of the Pharisaic holiness code. Jesus knows that he has been touched. The focus is placed on the poor woman and the scandal that she has caused by touching Jesus. In response, the woman falls on her face in front of Jesus. In this action she is showing him honour, the same honour that Jairus showed at the beginning of the story! Here we see a second reversal of status. She is before Jesus as the equal to Jairus the Archon. Jesus calls her "daughter", thus recognising her status in the family of Israel. In fact, her faith is shown as being greater than even that of Jesus' own disciples (Mk 4:40). Her faith, her stubborn initiative and her courage to reach out, have all brought her a reversal of social status and of virtue. She alone is spoken of as having told the truth. She is the one with virtue, and that has been won by taking action in faith. This is the shocking revelation of the Gospel, that it is by faith that virtue or power are to be had and not by strict observance of the Law. It is this teaching that distinguishes the way of Jesus from the old way. This also defines the nature of tear and wearing within the garment that is in need of patching (Mk. 2:21). Those injustices, barriers to participation and human miseries, brought about by the Law itself, have worn or destroyed the social fabric. A social reversal has been indicative of the action necessary to restore the whole community of faith. News that Jairus' daughter is dead comes at the very moment Jesus speaks to the woman. We read in Mark 5:34-35, that the two utterances, about the two 'daughters', coincide; "Daughter, your faith has made
you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease." While he
was still speaking, some people came from the leader's house to say,
"Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the teacher any further?"
When read or heard from a Jewish point of view, the shocking reversal is complete. The outsider is now greeted as a living daughter and the daughter of the insider is dead. Now, Jesus exhorts Jairus to believe and brings ridicule upon himself. This exhortation is another important reversal in the story, for Jairus began his approach with an exhortation of Jesus. Now Jesus exhorts him to believe. Jesus stands instructing a leader of the synagogue to learn about faith from the example of this one, outcast woman. Israel has been subverted even while the watchers laugh. But overhearing what they said,
Jesus said to the leader of the synagogue, "Do not fear, only
believe." He allowed no one to follow him except Peter, James,
and John, the brother of James. When they came to the house
of the leader of the synagogue, he saw a commotion, people weeping and
wailing loudly. When he had entered, he said to them, "Why
do you make a commotion and weep? The child is not dead but
sleeping." And they laughed at him.(Mark 5: 36-40)
When Jesus describes Jairus' daughter as being asleep, Mark introduces a motif that he later uses as a symbol of lack of faith (see Mk 13:36 and 14:32ff.). Jesus throws out the scoffers and disbelievers. He takes ritual defilement upon himself, (Lev. 21:11) by taking the dead child's hand, compounding, by his own deliberate action, the prior scandal of unwitting defilement through having been touched by an unclean woman. He raises the girl back to life, in view of her parents and his inner circle of disciples. Laughter turns to incredulity, as Jesus demonstratively seeks to awaken faith, for both his disciples and the family of Jairus as they are overcome with amazement. Jesus tells them to feed the girl and instructs them to say nothing to no-one. When Mark ends his Gospel, as the women leave the empty tomb after hearing the news of resurrection (Mk 16:8a), we meet this same pattern of themes, of awakening, of resurrection, of being overcome with amazement, and of saying nothing to anyone. If there is still a doubt about how we are to interpret this story, Mark's aside, that the girl is twelve years old, of the age of puberty, points up the interpretive contrasts. The girl has lived well for twelve years, in the privilege and status of the Archon's household. The woman had hemorrhaged for twelve years and had lost all her wealth seeking a cure. Her status was as an outcast, cut-off by the very religious precepts that Jairus the Archon represents. Twelve is the symbol of the twelve tribes of Israel, the privileged Ones of God, God's Chosen People. These daughters, within the family of Israel, represent both ends of the social scale, the privileged rich and the underprivileged poor. They also represent the insiders and the outsiders of the old order and of the new fabric in striking reversals of power. Where there was life, there comes death, and where there is death, comes awakened life. The outsiders become the bearers of faith, overturning the expectations of the privileged ones who saw themselves as insiders. What began as a healing sought for the daughter of the synagogue, from a position of privilege and social correctness, was subverted by the cause of the lone woman. Jesus turned aside from the privileged ones to restore the outcast to true "daughterhood". Then, and only then, could the daughter of the synagogue be restored. The privileged one had to learn from the underprivileged about what it means to have faith. The faith of the nameless woman stands with that of the nameless Syrophoenician woman of Mark 7:24-30, as a truthful witness to faith. In Mark 10:31, 43, we learn that the last will be first and the least will be greatest in the realm of God. Clearly, Mark's Jesus shows a priority for the poor and the outcast ones that represents a reversal of expectation and subverts the assumptions of the privileged ones. In this, Jesus is shown by Mark to be in the tradition of the prophets. Like Elisha, who raised the dead son of a woman of Shunen (2 Kgs 4:8-37), and then fed the multitudes by multiplying loaves of bread during a severe famine (2 Kgs 4:38-44), Jesus commands the people to feed the girl. Later in Mark's narrative, Jesus will feed the crowds in the wilderness (Mk 6:35ff.). For the moment, our lesson is that those of privilege will benefit from learning of faith, as seen in that of the outcasts. Like Jairus' daughter, the insiders stand on the verge of death until the outcasts have been included in the new life of the realm of God. In this is the Gospel of radical inclusivity. Who are today's people of privilege? Actually, things have not changed much, for we still see some religious people of our day claiming privilege for themselves and making others into outcasts, placing limits on social diversity and participation. Such claims have isolated and repressed people through race, gender, sexuality and social status. Liberating people from racial prejudice, gender stereotypes, homophobia, class distinction and poverty are causes still being fought against religious practice of law and privilege. Where people are held separated by selective application of arkhonic custom or are made poor and dispossessed by adherence to Levitical law, they subvert established comfort zones with their presence. With those who speak against patriarchy (abuse by male dominance) and kyriarchy (abuse by lording it over others) they hold the hermeneutic privilege that will awaken the sleepers from the sleep of death that follows a lack of action through faith. Those who hear their voice and comprehend their christic praxis, will disregard marks of distinction such as skin colour, gender, sexuality and social status. Such awakening will bring new life to all, both those outside and within the dominant norms, such that new norms are established that are inclusive and not oppressive. This text in Mark 5, has become one of the significant texts for liberation among Christian women, the poor, the lonely, the sick and the dispossessed. It is read as a text of liberation in Central America. Among gay and lesbian Christians it is a key pointer to inclusivity. It can also speaks to religious people of inclusivity and justice making. It reminds them that truth is not the preserve of custom, Levitical Law and social status, but of faith. This is part of Jesus’ halakah that stands in marked contrast to that of the Pharisees and the holiness code that causes division and social hardship.7 In Mark's story of disparity between two daughters of Israel, the call is to overturn the religious structures that create "insiders" and "outsiders". It calls for the people of privilege, virtue and power to remove the barriers that enable them to participate while preventing others from doing the same. Unjust structures enable some people to have access to food, housing, education and privilege, while others go without. Unjust structures keep some people in positions of power while others are denied access to the very same privileges through a cosmetic application of codes of holiness. One case in point in our time, concerns gay and lesbian Christian participation in the church, for they know what it is like to be counted among today's outcasts. They dare to claim dignity and worth and reach out with their faith in Jesus Christ. Levitical Law is used to bar their full participation. The church needs to go beyond the Levitical Law and reorient towards faithful healing of the social fabric, bringing in the outcasts and changing the hearts the people of privilege and denial. We need to capture the vision of radical inclusivity that inspired Mark the Evangelist. Our guides are Jesus and the courage of faith shown by a nameless and powerless woman, who had the courage to reach out from within the crowd. We may need to overturn a few social prohibitions to achieve inclusivity. The comfort zones of some people may be subverted, as others are permitted to share their brokenness with God, to speak of their pain, to speak their truth and to participate wholly, as God's people of faith. Church members will need courage to allow the nameless woman of Mark 5:27-30 to become their sister, along with others like her among the despised and dispossessed. In our time it is perhaps difficult to grasp the metaphor of disease through hemorrhage than it was in the biblical times. Medical and social custom has improved things. To give the metaphor a modern impact, consider the metaphoric parallels of a person who disrupts exclusive comfort zones or challenges the marks of distinction by which we define ourselves and our community of faith. The Levitical code of holiness is applied selectively in our time. We may not prohibit women, dwarfs and cripples from leadership, or ban the planting of hybrids or wearing mixed fibre cloth or having tattoos or eating pork, shrimps, prawns and lobster or advocate the killing of disobedient children, or get too worried about Sabbath observances, as the Levitical Law requires. However, in some places, our church people erect barriers of distinction based on sexuality and an appeal to Levitical Law to inhibit the membership and participation of gay and lesbian people in their church communities. Gay and lesbian persons are placed under threat, harassment and vilification, with threats of limits being placed on their participation in the life and ministry of the church so that their ministries are devalued. The cost of denying Gospel values of justice-making and a preferential option for the outcasts and under privileged ones, by people acting as the "Pharisees" of our time, is high. The call by Mark’s Jesus is to move beyond the arkhonic, beyond the patriarchal power of privilege that rules over others, to remove the barriers and restore life to those whom our church has cast aside. The call is to see faith as the point of entry and of power and not strict adherence of Levitical Law or discriminatory social custom. This is part of the way of Jesus, the new, pre-shrunken cloth, to be applied to the old fabric. A Story of Transfiguration: a glimpse of the whole fabric The narrative of the robe continues in Mark 9:3, with the appearance of Jesus in a white robe at the transfiguration… Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart, by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his clothes became dazzling white, such as no one on earth could bleach them. And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses, who were talking with Jesus. (Mark 9:2-4) Mk 9:2-4 is a bridging theme that recalls the "man in glorified clothing" of Daniel 10:5ff., in a narrative, apocalyptic moment or a vision of the inner circle of disciples, Peter, James and John, in which the robe itself is transformed as a symbolic white robe of martyrdom. The narrative hint of martyrdom keeps alive the mysterious theme of "losing life but saving it" that was introduced in Mark 8:35. It gives the reader a forward looking glimpse at the death and resurrection that is to come and provides a narrative reference point for similar imagery that is used later in the Gospel. While the theme of "losing life but saving it" is brought back into the narrative at this point, it is not sustained. It will emerge again with great significance in the stories located in the Garden of Gethsemane. For now, the image of the white robe links Jesus to traditions associated with the prophets Moses and Elijah. Moses, the bearer of the Law, who was himself transfigured (Ex. 34:29-35) stands with Jesus and Elijah, the prophet who returned to the struggle (1Kgs 19:11ff.) and who has been previously identified with John the Baptist (Mk. 6:15). Elijah is also the forerunner of God Himself and comes before the day of the Lord (Malachi 4:5; Sirach 48.1-11). Thus the mantle of "Law giver" and of "prophet" is associated with Jesus, as martyr, who stands transformed as the one to save life by losing it. This is the high point of the narrative of the robe. From this point on, the robe takes on negative connotations, unfolding further dramatic, symbolic meanings concerning the Way. Entering the way of Jesus: engaging the new fabric of radical discipleship In the story of Bartimaeus, the narrative use of the robe focuses attention on the decisive actions of Bartimaeus in throwing off his own cloak and in coming to Jesus. The story builds dramatically, as one man casts off his robe, other robes are thrown across the back of an ass and Jesus sits on it, thus further repudiating the old order. The crowd heralds a radical re-socialisation, by casting their robes on the ground, to welcome the one who brings in the kingdom, as the symbolic fabric of the old order is trampled under foot, as Jesus enter Jerusalem. Thus the people commence entry into the way of Jesus, to participate in the reign of God as a new community of discipleship that transcends even family, race, class, social position and the old order. Their action of casting their clothes before Jesus enacts the call in Mark 1: 3b, 'Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight'. To prepare the way is to cast off the old order, symbolically represented in casting clothes before Jesus as he journeys into Jerusalem- the centre of the old order. The little apocalypse, of Mark 13, continues to repudiate the old order, for we see in Mk. 13:14-16 the reference to leaving the robe behind, as the "one in the field" is called to war. In this there is complete negation of the old order. Mark’s Jesus calls for the casting aside of the old order as a lost cause, symbolised by fleeing the city, not returning to "the house" and leaving the fabric of the old order behind. Positive though this may be, at this point in the narrative, the overall value becomes negative, as the narrative moves to apparent disaster at the cross. An interlude- the "little apocalypse" of Mark 13, as a call to flight Mark’s Gospel interweaves many shades of meaning around a single motif. Clearly, the exhortation to flee the city is one calling for abandonment of the centre of the old order. It prepares the hearer or reader to realise that the new centre is Jesus himself. However there is an interesting question of interpretation that is worth noting here. Does this justify the flight to Pella by the Jerusalem Christians, c. 70CE? Mark’s Gospel was written in a time of immanent war with Rome. It is probable that the description of the "desolating sacrilege", which recalls Daniel 11:31, 12:11, and the use of the tradition of Jeremiah 21, is applied to the context of the Roman siege of Jerusalem (years 66-70 CE). In which case, the call for casting aside the old order as a lost cause, calls for flight and justifies it. The incident of clothing Jesus in purple The incident of the "purple robe" does not carry the word ‘robe’ in Greek, as the clause, "and they clothed him in purple," is used, to signify royal status. In this incident, the robe of the new fabric is truly absent, in fact and in the narrative symbolism. The wearing of purple is a Roman symbol of senatorial authority, power and of kingship- the so called, "royal purple" - and stripping away of the purple signals that "kingship" is not of the way of Jesus. His mockery and humiliation, at the hands of the Roman powers, is cruelly ironic, in that Jesus claimed no royal status. Collapse of the narrative of the robe Mark appears to dismantle his own metaphor as the narrative use of the robe in Mark 15:20 & 24, becomes negative, in that the robes that figured centrally in the way of Jesus are first made his own as the soldiers strip him of the purple cloak and put his own garments on him and lead him out to be crucified. The clothes are then divided among those who carry out the crucifixion. Significantly, the crowds of people who heralded Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem and the new order, are silent. Jesus’ own clothes lie on the ground, removed and being divided. The position of the garments at the time of the entry into Jerusalem, on the ground, now signifies defeat and the taking of spoil by the enemy. The old fabric falls as a spoil of Rome. The robe of new order has apparently failed to appear. Ironically, the Evangelist has already set the symbolic structures that will show the way beyond the cross and the collapse of all hope. These symbols, too, are based on garments. The Narrative of the Young Man, of nakedness and an exchange of clothing: a redefinition of the way of Jesus. Before the narrative of the robe of new order appears to collapse at the cross, the Evangelist introduces a new symbol, using new words for garments. Two other significant instances occur in which clothing appears as a narrative focus. One is in the story of the young man fleeing naked from Gethsemane at the time of the arrest. It is in this story that the seeds of transformation are revisited. The other is in the appearance of a "young man wrapped in white garments" at the empty tomb. In each case a different word is used for garments refer to a linen cloth, such as one worn over the naked body as bed clothes or clothes, and to a long robe.8 The story of the young man and his cast off linen cloth (Mark 14:51-52) forms a narrative bridge to the resurrection, a glimpse of the end that is yet to unfold. The symbolic action of leaving behind a "cloth" continues the motif of casting off the "old fabric" and opens the way to eventually comprehending the new fabric. Once the Gospel reaches that point, it astonishingly presents the call to discipleship once again. On the surface, the story seems inconsequential, a little cameo of mystery included at the high point of the drama. However, this is neither a casual point of eye-witness detail, nor an instance of the Evangelist placing his own signature up the narrative as many preachers have presented this story to me in the past. The two new terms that are introduced, "young man" and "linen cloth" bridge significant events and persons in the following narrative and are important interpretive keys. The young man was following Jesus. He is naked, except for a linen cloth wrapped around his body, and he runs off discarding it when those in the crowd "with swords" (v. 43) grabbed hold of him. Recalling Mark 8:35, he is as one "saving life but losing it," symbolic of the disciples, as followers of the way who have failed to keep vigil, having slept through the ordeal of the Garden and finally deserted Jesus by fleeing in the shame of betrayal and denial (Mark 14:50). As the fabric of change collapses around the disciples, they save their own lives but lose the life of discipleship. The young man "following Jesus" encapsulates the failure of the disciples, who no longer appear as ones dressed in the new fabric of discipleship but as sleepers, ones dressed for the grave, who flee to save their lives, symbolised by leave behind the fallen, linen cloth. The linen cloth appears again as the cloth in which Joseph of Arimathea wraps Jesus’ body prior to placing it in the tomb (Mark 15:46). The young man appears again at the open tomb, to announce the resurrection. However, at its point in the narrative, the story of the fleeing, naked, young man carries a nuance of flight, shame and loss of the way of discipleship. There is an account given in a letter by Clement of Alexandria9 that we may use to support this interpretation of the story of the young man. Clement is corresponding to Theodore concerning the practices of a sect known as the Carpocratians. The point of controversy is over their interpretation of passages from the Secret Gospel of Mark in which a reference to a young man who comes to Jesus at night.10 Clement confirms the existence of Secret Mark, attributes it to Mark the Evangelist and quotes two passages from it to Theodore. In the longer passage, the appearance of the young man wearing a linen cloth occurs immediately after an account of Jesus raising a young man from the dead. This story is very similar to that in John 11, of the raising of Lazarus. Clement states that this story is meant to be inserted between Mark 10.34 and 35. 11 Secret Mark says that the young man stayed with Jesus for the night "because Jesus taught him the mystery of the reign of God". The suggestion that Jesus spent the night with a semi-clad youth, thus raising the possibility of an homoerotic association, as well as the teaching of "mysteries of the reign of God",12 is inferred from the tenor of Clement’s letter concerning the practices of the Carpocratians and does not concern us here. The imagery in the passage from Secret Mark is of one seeking hierophantic13 or esoteric knowledge through a dying and rising rite for which the wearing of a linen cloth is perhaps symbolic dress, as of one prepared for the grave. Thus the question arises as to whether the parallel imagery14 in Mark also allows a similar interpretation, providing insight to the symbol of the linen cloth, as one dressed as for a hierophantic rite, in grave clothes that accompany dying to the old way and resurrection to the new. The young man in Secret Mark is the one who had been previously dead in Bethany and was raised to life by Jesus. The wearing of a linen cloth, which is to be understood as wearing a burial shroud, perhaps as part of preparation for a baptismal rite or hierophantic event, identifies the one raised by Jesus who is named Lazarus in John. He is the one who, having lost life, gained life through "being raised". The appearance of a similar figure at this point, in canonical Mark 14:51-52, raises hopes that Jesus may save the situation through an extraordinary, hierophantic event, manifesting the divine presence to save him. The fall of the linen cloth and the young man’s flight, quickly dispels such an expectation of hope and re-introduces the riddle of "losing life and saving it". Thus the young man in a linen cloth in the Gospel of Mark is an image that speaks of rites of passage and hierophantic mysteries that heightens the drama of Gethsemane. In the falling away of the cloth and in his flight, there is a dramatic reversal of meaning, the naked man and his fallen linen cloth symbolise "saving life but losing it" and the loss of hope. This fits precisely with the state of the disciples in Mark 14:32-50, who fail to keep vigil, fall asleep and do not share in Jesus’ rite of passage in Gethsemane so that discipleship appears lost in shame as ones saving life but losing it. The metaphor of the linen cloth having become negative like the metaphor of the robe, also makes an appearance at the Cross. After Jesus’ death, Joseph of Arimathea, (ironically, "himself waiting expectantly for the reign of God" v. 43), comes and takes the body and wraps it in a linen cloth. Then Joseph bought a linen cloth,
and taking down the body, wrapped it in the linen cloth, and laid it in
a tomb that had been hewn out of the rock. He then rolled a stone
against the door of the tomb. Mary Magdalene and Mary the mother of
Joses saw where the body was laid. (Mark 15:46-47)
The motif of the discarded linen cloth, the cloth of betrayal and shame, re-appears as the cloth borne by Joseph in his concern to remove shame from the Sabbath. Joseph’s concern in his approach to Pilate is to avoid polluting the Sabbath. It is not a disciple’s act of compassion but the last word, of a member of the Sanhedrin, in putting Jesus away. There is no decent burial. Joseph covers the offending presence, as if with the fallen, linen cloth of shame, protecting the Sabbath in a final triumph of the authorities. The rolling of the stone closes the story as a member of the Sanhedrin causes the tomb to be closed. The act of finality at the cross is repeated in the entombment. Seemingly, any hope of hierophantic appearance is lost. However, in a scandalous reversal of the social order, reminding those who are alert of Jesus’ own teaching, the women are the remaining disciples of witness; and their "seeing" becomes the lead into hope. Mark quickly moves us along, however, for, in Mark 16:5, when the women arrive at the tomb, the figure of a young man reappears there and "sitting on the right side", fully clothed in a long, white robe.15 This transformation or exchange of clothing represents a promise and challenge of transfiguration (for the description of the clothing recalls the transfiguration story of Mark 9:1-3). It represents a promise and a challenge to discipleship. There is a way forward for the community of disciples, by way of an answer to the riddle of Mark 8:35: For those who want to save their life will lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of the gospel, will save it. Thus the first young man symbolises "saving life and losing it" and he is wrapped in the linen cloth of shame, as one asleep or dead to the risk of discipleship. The second young man symbolises "losing life and saving it" and is wrapped in a long, white robe of martyrdom, as one adept in the way of the cross and nonviolence that was taken up by Jesus in Gethsemane while the disciples slept and then fled. The position of the young man, "sitting on the right side", is a powerful symbol of solidarity. The position "on the right side’ is mentioned in Psalm 110:1 as the place for the Messiah; it recalls the former contest between the inner circle of disciples for such a position of power and place in the community (Mark 10:37); it is given as the place for Jesus as the Human One (Mark 14:62) and the same place was given to one of the bandits at the crucifixion (Mark 15:27). This place of solidarity is for those who are active in "losing life and saving it" (Mk 8:35). It is the place of martyrs, as symbolised by the white garment in which the young man is wrapped. This presents a radical challenge to solidarity and a promise of overcoming the apparent collapse of the way as seen in the garden and at the cross. The young man declares that Jesus, "who was crucified", has been "raised" (Mark 16:6). Thus he introduces a model of confession for the new or re-instated disciples, the transformed ones, of the new fabric, who will confess "the crucified one". The new direction is to follow him "into Galilee" - the place where it all started! Promise and challenge coincide in the possibility of transformation and the healing of the young community of disciples. In the language of the original use of the robe (Mark 2:21, 13: 14-16), the call is to embrace the new order and to discard the old. That is, to stand as one naked in the stark reality of the way of the Crucified One, to take hold of the promise implicit in the new garment cut from the cloth of the reign of God. That is the white garment of martyrdom that was first seen at the place of transfiguration and now appears at the place of resurrection. What was of Jesus transfigured, is now shown as a call to the new community of faith in order to work their own transfiguration from "nakedness" to discipleship through the way of the Cross, of "losing life but saving it" as followers of the way. Thus, in following Mark’s use of ta himatia, "the robe," we move from the old fabric to the new, from Jesus’ repudiation of the "old fabric" and the "unshrunken new fabric" of social and political order in Judaea to the shrunken, tested and so transformed new fabric of the reign of God. The transformed fabric is presented as that of martyrs and defines the new family and the way of discipleship, the way or halakah of Jesus, as those who are active in "losing life and saving it", the way of resurrection, of transfiguration as people of the halakah of Jesus, defined as "losing life and saving it".
He called the crowd with his disciples, and said to them, "If any want
to become my followers, let them deny themselves and take up their
cross and follow me. For those who want to save their life will
lose it, and those who lose their life for my sake, and for the sake of
the gospel, will save it.
(Mark 8: 34 - 35). The cross one takes up is the journey of discipleship, joining Jesus where he is, on the Way. To "lose life" is to turn from the ways of the old fabric, to exit the comfort zones of familiarity and to follow the way or halakah of Jesus as a choice for life as disciples. Throughout the Gospel, Mark has been taking us on a journey with Jesus, issuing calls to discipleship along the way. The journey is towards Jerusalem and the temple, the centre of political and religious order. Once at the temple, Jesus repudiates the very centre of nation and cult. At the cross, Jesus is revealed as the centre towards which we have been journeying all along. At the empty tomb the disciples are told that the centre has moved ahead of them, into Galilee. The journey begins again, from where it started, this time it is a journey of discipleship, which was defined through out the Gospel as a journey towards the centre and is now represented as a possibility for a life of discipleship centred on Jesus and the gospel of salvation through the way of Jesus. The abrupt ending of the Gospel at Mark 16:8, is open for the final call to discipleship to begin in the reader or hearer, as a new journey towards Jesus in the new fabric of the reign of God, open to the possibilities of authentic transformation, as one "losing life and saving it". Postscript Bibliography Anderson, W. L., Outing
Jesus: A Descriptive Analysis of the Hermeneutics, Christologies and
Christic Practice in Lesbian and gay Liberation Theologies. Flinders University, School of Theology, Honours Thesis, 1997. Ehrman, Bart D., Lost Christianities: The Battles for Scripture and Faiths We never Knew. (Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York, 2003.)
Miller, R. J., (Ed.)., The Complete Gospels, (Polebridge Press, Sonoma, CA.,1992) End Notes Glossary
W. L. Anderson B.A., B.Ed., B.Th {Hons.), Dip. T. |