Sometimes asking just the right question of a text can open it up for
us in ways that we might not have otherwise seen coming, but that speak straight to the heart and soul of our life with Jesus, once we do. Matthew 19:1-9 is such a text, where the
Pharisees approach Jesus “to test him,” and they ask if it’s “lawful for a man
to divorce his wife for any and every reason” (v.3). The crucial question here is just: “In what
way is this particular question about the lawfulness of divorce a test for Jesus?”
Most commenters on this passage point out that the
Pharisees seem to be asking Jesus to clarify his own stance on divorce,
vis-a-vis the prevailing schools of rabbinical thought at the time. The question here seems to centre around the directions
found in Deuteronomy 24 on when, and why, and how a man may issue his wife a
certificate of divorce. There were,
basically, two prevailing approaches to this passage in Jesus’ time. A rabbi named Shammai held that Deuteronomy
24 actually prohibits divorce except
in the case of marital unfaithfulness, whereas Rabbi Hillel argued that
Deuteronomy 24 permits divorce for
any reason. Inasmuch as the followers of these two rabbis disagreed quite
sharply over the correct reading of Torah when it came to divorce, the
Pharisees seem to be asking Jesus if he is more of a Shammaite or a Hillelite in
this regard: is divorce always okay,
or only okay in the case of unfaithfulness?
Jesus lands more or less with Shammai on this one: the spirit of Deuteronomy 24 was to place limits on the practice of divorce,
not to open it wide.
So far so good, but this doesn’t answer the question of
why this would have been a test for
Jesus. If both approaches had rabbinical
precedence in Jesus’ time, it’s hard to see how asking him to come down on one
side or the other in the debate would have been a test—a controversial position,
maybe, but hardly a test. The problem
intensifies when you notice that this question sounds a lot like a question
they’ll ask him later on about paying taxes to Caesar (Matthew 22:15-22); and
there Matthew calls the question a “trap.”
In what way might this have actually been a trap for him?
These questions hang in the air until you
notice that Matthew starts off this story by pointing out that the Pharisees
ask him about his position on divorce after he “left Galilee and went into the
region of Judea, to the other (i.e. the east) side of the Jordan.” This is no random piece of Jesus’ travel
itinerary. Jesus left Judea and went
into Galilee way back in 4:12, when he heard that John the Baptist had been put
in prison. John, of course, was
imprisoned by Herod; he was beheaded in Matthew 14:1-11 and his death, it
seems, was one of the events that precipitated Jesus’ return to the region
around the Jordan.
And here is where one plus one plus one equals “Ah-ha...” Because we know that before his execution this is where John conducted the
majority of his preaching and baptism ministry: in the Transjordan region of
Judea, the very the spot where Jesus is now answering questions about his
position on divorce. And we know that
John was beheaded specifically because he had spoken out against Herod’s
marriage to Herodias, his brother Philip’s ex-wife. Herod had convinced Herodias to leave Philip
and marry him, and John spoke out against this divorce, saying it was not
lawful for Herod to marry her. It was
John’s challenge to the powers that be, over
the question of marriage and divorce specifically, that got him killed.
Suddenly the trap becomes altogether obvious, because we
know, as well as those first century Pharisees knew, that John saw his ministry
as a preparatory work, preparing
people for Jesus. In this sense, Jesus’
ministry stands in continuity with John’s, and (and this is a big and), it was John’s commitment to the sanctity
of marriage that got him killed.
So, Jesus, what do you
think? Is it okay for a man to divorce
his wife (like Philip did Herodias)? And
if so, is it okay for the wife to remarry (like Herodias did with Herod)?
We could unpack the very profound things Jesus says about
how marriage permanence and exclusivity was in the Creator’s mind right from
the beginning (19:4-5), and how, in this sense, permanent and exclusive
marriages contribute in some mysterious way to Creation Shalom. In this regard, divorce is sort of like
open-heart surgery. There may be times
when it’s the only option left, but it should only be undertaken when there are no options left, and even then it’s
a sign that something very serious has gone wrong, deep down in the heart of
Creation.
We could reflect on all that; but what I’m mulling over,
instead, is how in affirming the Creator’s design for permanent and exclusive marriages, Jesus is quite
literally laying his life on the line.
He knows it, and the Pharisees know it, but, like a pastor friend of
mine put it when we were talking about this passage, “Jesus cares so much about the Creator’s heart for
marriage, that he’s prepared to die for it.”
This is where the text starts to speak to the heart and soul for us, because it's asking us, I think, if we share his commitment to the Creator's plan for marriage. This question speaks differently to all of us, of course, depending on our circumstances--newly weds just starting out, singles praying for God's direction in their lives, long-time married couples for whom the flame's been flickering, those who have been through the open heart surgery of divorce and are trying now to pick up the pieces, couples dating and trying to set boundaries, couples engaged and waiting, those who have chosen celibacy, families, communities of faith--it speaks differently, but it does speak to us all. Are we prepared to join Jesus in the self-sacrifice and personal risk and laying-down-of-life that it takes to make marriage a true witness to the Creator's plan for things?
0 comments:
Post a Comment