TWENTY-SEVENTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME, Cycle B, October 4, 2009</ti= tle>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=3DEN-US style=3D'tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=3DSection1> TWENTY-SEVENTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME, Cycle B, October 4, 2009<o:= p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; This gospel passage (Mark 10:2-16) contains one of the seven New Testament texts dealing with divorce and remarriage. It is very interesting to see how this prohibition against divorce a= nd remarriage came about, and how it was adapted to changing circumstances in = the early church.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Divorce was taken for granted in Judaism at the time of Jesus, but it was always ta= ken from the perspective of the transgressions of the woman and never the = man because the woman was considered the man’s property. It is reflected in the Old Testame= nt in such passages as the first four verses of Deuteronomy 24 that forbid divorc= ed couples to remarry each other on ritual grounds. But these verses shed light indire= ctly on what were considered grounds for divorce: a man could divorce his wife f= or (in Hebrew) ‘erwath dābār, literally, "something indecent." <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Now this phrase, "something indecent," was open to interpretation.<sp= an style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> We know, for instance, that in the= first century B.C.E. the more conservative rabbinical school of Shammai put the emphasis on the word "indecent" and allowed divorce for such offe= nses as a woman talking with a stranger or not wearing a veil in public; whereas= the more liberal school of Hillel put the emphasis on the word "something" and gave as an example of sufficient grounds for divo= rce a woman spoiling her husband's favorite dish at dinner! <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; This rabbinical dispute underlies the version of today's story found in the later gospel we call according to Matthew (19:1-9), in which Jesus is pictured be= ing asked whether a man may divorce his wife for "any cause whatever." Many scholars= think that this later gospel’s version may be the more original because of = its understandable Palestinian background.&nbs= p; But two texts from the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that all div= orce was prohibited by some first-century C.E. Palestinian Jews, at least by mem= bers of the Essene denomination. T= his helps us understand the import of the unqualified question put to Jesus by = the Pharisees in today's earlier gospel passage (Mark 10:2-16), "Is it law= ful for a husband to divorce his wife?"<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Now Jesus is reported to have spoken against divorce in at least three independ= ent sources [Mark, Q, and Paul], although the report of what Jesus said varies. But the answer both of these gospel authors picture Jesus giving is a counter-question and an appe= al to the ideal of creation. The= re is an allusion to Gen 1:27, "God made them male and female," to whic= h is joined Gen 2:24 from today's first reading (Gen 2:18-24), "For this re= ason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the = two shall become one [or: one flesh]."&nb= sp; In other words, the strict interpretation given here in an aphorism = that undercuts social and religious convention (“What God has joined toget= her, no human being may separate”) is that no human authority can take precedence over the intention of God reflected in the two myths of creation that begin the Bible.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> &= nbsp; The first of these, of course, is the story in Genesis 1 of God creating the wo= rld in six days and resting on the seventh.&nb= sp; This is derived from the Babylonian myth of creation and paralleled = by various other cosmogonies from the ancient Near East, with the striking differences that here God is pictured as creating all things simply by a dynamic word and specifically creating man and woman in their complementarity in his own image and likeness. This is very important. The second commandment, in its ori= ginal version, forbade making statues of the God of Israel. The only time that “statue&#= 8221; is used of God in the Bible is after the creation of man and woman. The Hebrews’ insight was that their God was so spiritual that only man and woman in their equality were = an adequate representation of God on earth.&n= bsp; Isn’t that beautiful? <o:p> </o:p> = ; The second creation myth in Genesis 2 is basically a parable of human history.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> In the beginning everything was go= od: man, woman, sex—all creation symbolized by the Garden of Eden (‘eden in Hebrew means "pleasure"). Then s= in intervenes, symbolized by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil [a metaphor for moral autonomy], an assertion of independence on the part of human beings to decide for themsel= ves what is right and wrong. The consequence of this, according to the myth, is that human beings lost their primary unity with God and with one another. In the story, instead of being con= scious of their unity, they recognize their duality, that they are naked, and enter the world of creation with all its oppositions, estrangements, and hostilities.<o:p></o:p></= p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; It is against this mythological background that the first-century Jewish and Christian prohibitions of divorce are to be understood. They are basically addressing the = sinful situation of alienation and domination that glorified woman i= n her sexual aspects while oppressing her as an equal human being. Today's gospel text, instead of ar= guing on narrow legal grounds or on the precedent of tradition, appeals rather to= the ideal of creation. Whatever t= he practices and customs allowed by law and tradition, the ideal should always reflect that primeval unity and equality of man and woman.<o:p></o:p></span= > <o:p> </o:p> = ; Now, many of these New Testament divorce texts themselves show development and adaptation to changing situations in various early Christian communities.<s= pan style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Added to the passage in today's go= spel is a verse and a half that extends the saying attributed to Jesus to a situation found in Gentile Christian communities living under Roman law, in which a woman was allowed to divorce her husband, whereas in the Old Testam= ent understanding of the marriage bond, only the man, as the master, was able to divorce his wife. This adapta= tion led in turn to the remarkable addition at the end of verse 11, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her," which makes Jesus' words suggest that adulte= ry against a woman, which was never envisioned in Jewish society, was now something to be considered. This implies a much more elevated = view of the status of women than was generally accorded them in the patriarchal society of the time. Since di= vorce was always the man's prerogative, we may look at Jesus' stance as being very supportive of women.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Similarly, Paul adds to a saying attributed to Jesus in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 a formulation reflecting Hellenistic society in which it was possible for a w= oman to divorce her husband, as well as introducing an exception to the prohibition of divorce in v. 15, permitting a Christian "brother or sister" to remarry after being divorced by an "unbelieving partner." There is also = an exception listed in both divorce texts in the gospel according to Matthew (5:32; 19:9). Often translated "except in the case of adultery," this clause led to the age-old tradition of Eastern churches of permitting divorce and remarriage in cases= of adultery.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; But on closer examination, the exceptive clause again refers to a situation oft= en encountered in first-century Hellenistic society, namely, marriage within degrees of blood and/or legal relationship forbidden by Mosaic law, e.g., first-cousin, uncle-niece, or even brother-sister marriages. Marriages of that sort were not un= common in the Greco-Roman world—often to keep money in the family—but = they were regarded by the Jews as incest, and so Gentile converts to Christianit= y, who may have been in such marriages, were allowed to divorce and remarry.<o= :p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; We can see, therefore, a process of developing understanding as these texts pertaining to divorce and remarriage were adapted to changing circumstances even in the New Testament, the inspired record of early Christianity's reac= tion to Jesus and his teaching.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Finally, we begin today for our second reading selections from the Letter to the Heb= rews (2:9-11). There is not enough= time to go into it today except to invite you to see how the unknown author of t= his letter develops his main theme: that Christ is God's word of salvation communicated to us, not only through his teaching, but also through his experience of the humanity common to us all, as a means of restoring our devotion and strengthening us in our faith.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; With great rhetorical power, the author takes us through the whole of salvation history. He begins with how in times past God spoke to our ancestors in various ways but finally spoke to = us through a Son whom he made heir of all things (1:1-2), the climax of God’s word to humanity. </span= >And he ends with perhaps the most beautiful blessing in the New Testament: “May the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great shepher= d of the sheep by the blood of the eternal covenant, Jesus our Lord, furnish you with all that is good, that you may do his will. May he carry out in you what is pl= easing to him through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever. Amen” (13:20-21).<o:p></o:p>= </div> </body> </html> ------=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390 Content-Location: file:///C:/F5238E39/27odb09_files/header.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" <html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"> <meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document> <meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11"> <meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11"> <link id=3DMain-File rel=3DMain-File href=3D"../27odb09.htm"> <![if IE]> <base href=3D"file:///C:\F5238E39\27odb09_files\header.htm" id=3D"webarch_temp_base_tag"> <![endif]> </head> <body lang=3DEN-US> <div style=3D'mso-element:footnote-separator' id=3Dfs> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1 width=3D"33%"> <![endif]> </div> <div style=3D'mso-element:footnote-continuation-separator' id=3Dfcs> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1> <![endif]> </div> <div style=3D'mso-element:endnote-separator' id=3Des> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1 width=3D"33%"> <![endif]> </div> <div style=3D'mso-element:endnote-continuation-separator' id=3Decs> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1> <![endif]> </div> </body> </html> ------=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390 Content-Location: file:///C:/F5238E39/27odb09_files/filelist.xml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8" <xml xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"> <o:MainFile HRef=3D"../27odb09.htm"/> <o:File HRef=3D"header.htm"/> <o:File HRef=3D"filelist.xml"/> </xml> ------=_NextPart

MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary="----=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390" This document is a Single File Web Page, also known as a Web Archive file. If you are seeing this message, your browser or editor doesn't support Web Archive files. Please download a browser that supports Web Archive, such as Microsoft Internet Explorer. ------=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390 Content-Location: file:///C:/F5238E39/27odb09.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" TWENTY-SEVENTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME, Cycle B, October 4, 2009</ti= tle>  <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=3DEN-US style=3D'tab-interval:.5in'> <div class=3DSection1> TWENTY-SEVENTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME, Cycle B, October 4, 2009<o:= p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; This gospel passage (Mark 10:2-16) contains one of the seven New Testament texts dealing with divorce and remarriage. It is very interesting to see how this prohibition against divorce a= nd remarriage came about, and how it was adapted to changing circumstances in = the early church.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Divorce was taken for granted in Judaism at the time of Jesus, but it was always ta= ken from the perspective of the transgressions of the woman and never the = man because the woman was considered the man’s property. It is reflected in the Old Testame= nt in such passages as the first four verses of Deuteronomy 24 that forbid divorc= ed couples to remarry each other on ritual grounds. But these verses shed light indire= ctly on what were considered grounds for divorce: a man could divorce his wife f= or (in Hebrew) ‘erwath dābār, literally, "something indecent." <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Now this phrase, "something indecent," was open to interpretation.<sp= an style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> We know, for instance, that in the= first century B.C.E. the more conservative rabbinical school of Shammai put the emphasis on the word "indecent" and allowed divorce for such offe= nses as a woman talking with a stranger or not wearing a veil in public; whereas= the more liberal school of Hillel put the emphasis on the word "something" and gave as an example of sufficient grounds for divo= rce a woman spoiling her husband's favorite dish at dinner! <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; This rabbinical dispute underlies the version of today's story found in the later gospel we call according to Matthew (19:1-9), in which Jesus is pictured be= ing asked whether a man may divorce his wife for "any cause whatever." Many scholars= think that this later gospel’s version may be the more original because of = its understandable Palestinian background.&nbs= p; But two texts from the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls indicate that all div= orce was prohibited by some first-century C.E. Palestinian Jews, at least by mem= bers of the Essene denomination. T= his helps us understand the import of the unqualified question put to Jesus by = the Pharisees in today's earlier gospel passage (Mark 10:2-16), "Is it law= ful for a husband to divorce his wife?"<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Now Jesus is reported to have spoken against divorce in at least three independ= ent sources [Mark, Q, and Paul], although the report of what Jesus said varies. But the answer both of these gospel authors picture Jesus giving is a counter-question and an appe= al to the ideal of creation. The= re is an allusion to Gen 1:27, "God made them male and female," to whic= h is joined Gen 2:24 from today's first reading (Gen 2:18-24), "For this re= ason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the = two shall become one [or: one flesh]."&nb= sp; In other words, the strict interpretation given here in an aphorism = that undercuts social and religious convention (“What God has joined toget= her, no human being may separate”) is that no human authority can take precedence over the intention of God reflected in the two myths of creation that begin the Bible.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> &= nbsp; The first of these, of course, is the story in Genesis 1 of God creating the wo= rld in six days and resting on the seventh.&nb= sp; This is derived from the Babylonian myth of creation and paralleled = by various other cosmogonies from the ancient Near East, with the striking differences that here God is pictured as creating all things simply by a dynamic word and specifically creating man and woman in their complementarity in his own image and likeness. This is very important. The second commandment, in its ori= ginal version, forbade making statues of the God of Israel. The only time that “statue&#= 8221; is used of God in the Bible is after the creation of man and woman. The Hebrews’ insight was that their God was so spiritual that only man and woman in their equality were = an adequate representation of God on earth.&n= bsp; Isn’t that beautiful? <o:p> </o:p> = ; The second creation myth in Genesis 2 is basically a parable of human history.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> In the beginning everything was go= od: man, woman, sex—all creation symbolized by the Garden of Eden (‘eden in Hebrew means "pleasure"). Then s= in intervenes, symbolized by eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil [a metaphor for moral autonomy], an assertion of independence on the part of human beings to decide for themsel= ves what is right and wrong. The consequence of this, according to the myth, is that human beings lost their primary unity with God and with one another. In the story, instead of being con= scious of their unity, they recognize their duality, that they are naked, and enter the world of creation with all its oppositions, estrangements, and hostilities.<o:p></o:p></= p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; It is against this mythological background that the first-century Jewish and Christian prohibitions of divorce are to be understood. They are basically addressing the = sinful situation of alienation and domination that glorified woman i= n her sexual aspects while oppressing her as an equal human being. Today's gospel text, instead of ar= guing on narrow legal grounds or on the precedent of tradition, appeals rather to= the ideal of creation. Whatever t= he practices and customs allowed by law and tradition, the ideal should always reflect that primeval unity and equality of man and woman.<o:p></o:p></span= > <o:p> </o:p> = ; Now, many of these New Testament divorce texts themselves show development and adaptation to changing situations in various early Christian communities.<s= pan style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Added to the passage in today's go= spel is a verse and a half that extends the saying attributed to Jesus to a situation found in Gentile Christian communities living under Roman law, in which a woman was allowed to divorce her husband, whereas in the Old Testam= ent understanding of the marriage bond, only the man, as the master, was able to divorce his wife. This adapta= tion led in turn to the remarkable addition at the end of verse 11, "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her," which makes Jesus' words suggest that adulte= ry against a woman, which was never envisioned in Jewish society, was now something to be considered. This implies a much more elevated = view of the status of women than was generally accorded them in the patriarchal society of the time. Since di= vorce was always the man's prerogative, we may look at Jesus' stance as being very supportive of women.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Similarly, Paul adds to a saying attributed to Jesus in 1 Corinthians 7:10-11 a formulation reflecting Hellenistic society in which it was possible for a w= oman to divorce her husband, as well as introducing an exception to the prohibition of divorce in v. 15, permitting a Christian "brother or sister" to remarry after being divorced by an "unbelieving partner." There is also = an exception listed in both divorce texts in the gospel according to Matthew (5:32; 19:9). Often translated "except in the case of adultery," this clause led to the age-old tradition of Eastern churches of permitting divorce and remarriage in cases= of adultery.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; But on closer examination, the exceptive clause again refers to a situation oft= en encountered in first-century Hellenistic society, namely, marriage within degrees of blood and/or legal relationship forbidden by Mosaic law, e.g., first-cousin, uncle-niece, or even brother-sister marriages. Marriages of that sort were not un= common in the Greco-Roman world—often to keep money in the family—but = they were regarded by the Jews as incest, and so Gentile converts to Christianit= y, who may have been in such marriages, were allowed to divorce and remarry.<o= :p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; We can see, therefore, a process of developing understanding as these texts pertaining to divorce and remarriage were adapted to changing circumstances even in the New Testament, the inspired record of early Christianity's reac= tion to Jesus and his teaching.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; Finally, we begin today for our second reading selections from the Letter to the Heb= rews (2:9-11). There is not enough= time to go into it today except to invite you to see how the unknown author of t= his letter develops his main theme: that Christ is God's word of salvation communicated to us, not only through his teaching, but also through his experience of the humanity common to us all, as a means of restoring our devotion and strengthening us in our faith.<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> = ; With great rhetorical power, the author takes us through the whole of salvation history. He begins with how in times past God spoke to our ancestors in various ways but finally spoke to = us through a Son whom he made heir of all things (1:1-2), the climax of God’s word to humanity. </span= >And he ends with perhaps the most beautiful blessing in the New Testament: “May the God of peace, who brought up from the dead the great shepher= d of the sheep by the blood of the eternal covenant, Jesus our Lord, furnish you with all that is good, that you may do his will. May he carry out in you what is pl= easing to him through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever. Amen” (13:20-21).<o:p></o:p>= </div> </body> </html> ------=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390 Content-Location: file:///C:/F5238E39/27odb09_files/header.htm Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" <html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"> <meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document> <meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11"> <meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 11"> <link id=3DMain-File rel=3DMain-File href=3D"../27odb09.htm"> <![if IE]> <base href=3D"file:///C:\F5238E39\27odb09_files\header.htm" id=3D"webarch_temp_base_tag"> <![endif]> </head> <body lang=3DEN-US> <div style=3D'mso-element:footnote-separator' id=3Dfs> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1 width=3D"33%"> <![endif]> </div> <div style=3D'mso-element:footnote-continuation-separator' id=3Dfcs> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1> <![endif]> </div> <div style=3D'mso-element:endnote-separator' id=3Des> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1 width=3D"33%"> <![endif]> </div> <div style=3D'mso-element:endnote-continuation-separator' id=3Decs> <![if !supportFootnotes]> <hr align=3Dleft size=3D1> <![endif]> </div> </body> </html> ------=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390 Content-Location: file:///C:/F5238E39/27odb09_files/filelist.xml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/xml; charset="utf-8" <xml xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"> <o:MainFile HRef=3D"../27odb09.htm"/> <o:File HRef=3D"header.htm"/> <o:File HRef=3D"filelist.xml"/> </xml> ------=_NextPart_01CA42E7.AA2E7390--