Mark 11:1-11
And so begins the Way of the Cross. If I had to hazard a guess, I would be
inclined to think the disciples believed Jesus' entry into Jerusalem would be
the beginning of the end for the Roman occupation to make way for the
reestablishment of King David's reign. Though
Matthew and Luke add "donkey" to the animal mix, it may still have
seemed strange to them that the "king" would ride in on a colt
instead of on a majestic chariot pulled by mighty horses, but the disciples had
already seen many strange things. The
Master rarely did anything according to normal expectations, so why would this
day be any different?
That day was clearly one of great
expectation for those who participated in the celebrations by welcoming Jesus
as they did, but it is much more likely that what they had expected - truly
expected - did not come to pass. Such a
let-down, then, would help to explain why the same crowd that so eagerly
welcomed the "Son of David" could so easily turn only a few days
later into a lynch mob. Jesus the
Messiah, the anointed Son of David the great king, came into the city ... and
nothing happened. Nothing. There can be no greater level of
disappointment than to be led toward something with such great anticipation and
expectation ... and not get what we wanted or expected.
Palm Sunday, sometimes referred to and
commemorated as Passion Sunday, comes down to a difference of emphasis. One seems more victorious (Palm Sunday) while
the other is more sinister and bloody (Passion Sunday), when what we expected
did not happen. Both recognize important
aspects of Jesus' life in His final days on earth, but each one calls to
question where our own emphasis should be.
Each one demands our full attention as well as our full part in
all of it because if we are to be disciples - students, followers - of Christ,
they are both necessary components of the journey. And both must be considered for this reason: BOTH
acknowledge how easily humans can turn when they feel wronged or deceived. We might like to believe we would not act so
savagely, but we need only to look around to see that not much has changed in
2000 years.
Each is a necessary component of the
"Way of the Cross" where we must "contemplate the Sacred
Humanity of Christ who - in His great yearning to come close to each of one of
us - reveals Himself to us with all the weakness of [humanity] and with
all the magnificence of God" (St. Josemaria Escriva, "The Way
of the Cross"). So segments of
Jesus' life must never be "either/or" but must always be
"both/and". This is why our Wesleyan
tradition will not allow us to skip the blood-soaked trail to Golgotha.
St. Paul makes perhaps the best analogy
of what our journey must look like in his words to the Philippians: "Let
the same mind be in you that was in Christ Jesus who, though He was in the form
of God, did not regard equality with God as something to be exploited
[for His own purposes]; but emptied Himself, taking the form of a
slave ..."
Say what? A "slave"? Why, this is not reasonable. In fact it is downright un-American! This is entirely inconsistent with what we
have been taught since we were children!
I think, however, this is the point St. Paul was making, and it was the
point Jesus Himself was making when He rode in on a colt rather than on a war
horse. The "form of a slave"
is the form of complete submission. The
"form of a slave" has nothing to do with what we want or what we
think. The "form of a slave"
disregards self altogether for the sake of something much greater. It is the most unnatural act a human can
perform voluntarily. Oh, humans can be
beaten into submission over time as history has proved, but to voluntarily step
into such a role without a fight? Far be
it from us!
I think maybe what we glean from these
final days, in discovering at this point that Jesus' very life was no longer
His own, is the totality of
discipleship - not "segmented". It is not about the American "pursuit of
happiness"; it's not even about "life and liberty" with an
hour's worth of church attendance sprinkled about here and there. It is now - just as then - entirely about the
will of the Holy Father and what will be called and expected of us - and not
knowing what we will be led to next.
This, I think, is what scares us the
most because even though we pray it - "Your will be done" - we don't
really mean it. We know it must be
"ideally" so, but we also know deep within that complete submission
and the gift of the Holy Spirit will come with an "assignment"; an
"assignment" that may well interfere with our own plans; an
assignment that may have nothing to do with "life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness". Contemporary
theology refuses to believe that "personal" happiness is not part of
the discipleship package - because we cannot discern the difference between
"personal happiness" and "spiritual contentment".
So what about "personal
salvation"? Didn't Jesus endure
these things so we would not have to? Is the Way of the Cross not part and parcel
of the whole "He bore our sins upon Himself" thing by which we would
be spared? How does The Journey of
Christ, the Way of the Cross, the "Form of a Slave", fit into our
lives?
Clearly it doesn't. And more is the pity because it is only in this
submissive element of the journey in which we will find true fulfillment and
not necessarily "personal happiness"; certainly not as we would
understand it - and - certainly not as we would prefer to define it; because
the "Total Package" is as expressed by UM Bishop William Willimon: "This means the Holy Spirit connects us
not only with the creative Father but also with the suffering of
the Son; not only with divine power but also with divinely humble
service" ("Good News", Willimon, pg 21). This is probably the VERY LAST THING we would
expect - or even want!
I think Anselm, the 12th-century
archbishop of Canterbury, may have been on to something when he tried to
develop "rational" theology that would embrace both faith AND reason
as to why Christ's sacrifice was necessary. Atonement for sin was still the foundation of
his reasoning, but he added a twist. He
removed the evil one from the equation altogether. He suggested that Jesus did not enter into
this final segment of His journey in order to pay a debt to the evil one for
the redemption of humanity; He entered into Jerusalem "in the form of a
slave" to pay a debt to the Holy Father on behalf of all humanity;
a debt owed since the Beginning when Adam and Eve were ejected from
Paradise! Indeed how can the Almighty
God and Creator ever come into debt to the evil one??
It is an interesting concept not
entirely foreign to our own theology and necessary response. Christ Himself did indeed pay a debt that was
legitimately owed. This is the
foundational understanding of the "doctrine of original sin" and
still speaks to the Wesleyan understanding of the predisposed inclination of
humanity toward sin. That is, we are by
nature inclined toward self: self-satisfaction, self-fulfillment,
self-sufficiency, self-survival.
Imagine, then, if this were Jesus' own
inclination.
No comments:
Post a Comment