Bloomsbury Central Baptist Church
26 January 2020
Mark 5.1-20
Listen to this sermon here: https://soundcloud.com/bloomsbury-1/from-promised-land-to-compromised-land
Our journey through Mark’s gospel,
brings us
this week to the famous story of the Gadarene, or Gerasene, demoniac.
We’ll come to the man and his demons shortly,
but it’s
worth spending a bit of time first with the geography,
not least
because some of us here will be visiting this area later this year
on
our next Bloomsbury trip to Palestine and Israel.
The reading began with Jesus and his disciples crossing the
sea of Galilee,
and going
in to an area known as ‘The Decapolis’,
which got
its name from two Greek words,
deka, meaning ten, and polis, meaning cities.
The Decapolis was a group of ten cities
which in
the first century were on the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire.
They formed a group because of their common language, shared
culture,
geographical
location, and slightly uncertain political status,
with each city functioning as an autonomous city-state
dependent on Rome.
They are sometimes described as a league of cities,
although
it’s unclear whether they were ever formally organized as a political unit.
In terms of contemporary geography,
most of the
Decapolis region is now located in Jordan,
but Damascus is in Syria
and Hippos
and Scythopolis are in Israel.
At the time of Jesus, the Decapolis was a centre of Greek
and Roman culture
in a region
which was otherwise populated by Jewish people.
In other words, this was ‘Gentile territory’
that Jesus
was leading his followers into,
albeit Gentile territory with strongly Jewish links.
It was the land ‘beyond’ the Jordan,
a place
where less religiously observant Jews and God-fearing Gentiles,
could live
and trade alongside people
of
very different cultural and religious convictions to their own.
If Israel was the
promised land,
the Decapolis was the compromised
land.
And Jesus taking his disciples across the sea to visit it
was a
symbolic reversal of the journey taken by the children of Israel
at
the end of the Exodus
when they had
crossed the waters of the Jordan
to
take possession of the promised land.
And here I want us to pause for a moment,
and think
about that word I just used… did you spot it?
The word is ‘possession’,
and its use
to indicate ownership of land
is going to
be crucial to us in our engagement
with the
story of the demon possessed man from this region.
Let me read to you from the book of Leviticus,
which spells
out some of the purity legislation
that
the books of the law
recorded as having been given by God
to the Jews
as
they took possession of the promised land:
Lev. 20.22-26
You shall keep all my statutes and all my ordinances, and
observe them, so that the land to which I bring you to settle in may not vomit
you out.
23 You
shall not follow the practices of the nation that I am driving out before you.
Because they did all these things, I abhorred them.
24 But I
have said to you: You shall inherit their land, and I will give it to you to possess,
a land flowing with milk and honey. I am the LORD your God; I have separated
you from the peoples.
25 You
shall therefore make a distinction between the clean animal and the unclean,
and between the unclean bird and the clean; you shall not bring abomination on
yourselves by animal or by bird or by anything with which the ground teems,
which I have set apart for you to hold unclean.
26 You
shall be holy to me; for I the LORD am holy, and I have separated you from the
other peoples to be mine.
There it is again - that slippery word ‘possession’.
And according to Leviticus, God gave the children of Abraham
the promised land,
for them to
possess, for them to inhabit,
for them to
take from those who were already living there.
It’s uncomfortable at a number of levels, isn’t it?
I mean, do we really believe God works like this?
Does God
command people to displace other people
and take
possession of their land?
Some people believe this very strongly,
and it’s
the idea behind notions such as ‘The Christian Nation’,
but it also has very contemporary resonances for those
today,
who find
themselves living in places that other people lay claim to.
Whether or not you agree that Israel in our time
has the
right to possess the land of Palestine,
there is no denying the strong biblical precedent,
that
passages such as this offer to such possessing forces.
One potentially helpful perspective might be
that this
passage from Leviticus, and others like it,
rather than
being a direct record of what God said to the Jews
as
they stood on the east bank of the Jordan
looking
across at the land flowing with milk and honey;
is instead
a later text,
attempting
to theologically justify a historic act of violent possession,
by
claiming, post hoc, after the event,
that God told them to do it.
Another, equally uncomfortable, aspect of this
is the
division that we find here between holy and unholy,
between
clean and unclean.
Do we believe that God was, at some point in history,
only really
interested in one group of people,
who were holy and pure and clean
where
everyone else was unacceptable?
Certainly, the author of this part of Leviticus believed
this to be the case.
We might, of course, conclude that such an isolationist
perspective,
was a
betrayal rather than a fulfilment of God’s covenant with Abraham,
that God
would be his God, and his children would be God’s people,
because it denies that strand of theology within the Hebrew
Bible
which makes
it very clear that the purpose of God calling one nation,
leading
them into deeper discovery of God’s nature and purposes,
was so that
those people could then bring that blessing to others,
shining
as a light to all the nations.
And we might conclude that when Jesus, early in his
ministry,
deliberately
crossed the boundary into the Gentile territory of the Decapolis,
to bring
healing and restoration to those who lived there,
he was symbolically setting his ministry in direct
opposition
to those
forces of religion in his own time
which
were focussed on the nationalistic possession of land,
and on the maintenance of holiness
and purity codes at all costs.
And so Jesus goes over the sea.
And here we have a slight confusion within the textual
tradition,
because
it’s not quite clear which town is being talked about here.
There are two towns near each other,
with
similar sounding names.
One of them is Gerasa, and the other is Gadara,
and
depending on which ancient manuscript you’re reading,
the
exorcism either takes place
in
the region of the Gerasenes, or the Gadarenes.
Why does this matter, you might well ask?
Well, the problem is that the better textual tradition is
for Gerasa,
which is
what our pew Bibles go with.
But Gerasa, as you can see from the map, is quite some way
from the sea of Galilee,
which means
that two thousand demon possessed pigs,
running
all that way to the sea to drown themselves,
is rather
hard to visualise.
That part of the story would make much more sense at Gadara.
However, Gerasa may be the location of a notorious Jewish
revolt against the Romans,
referred to
by the Jewish Historian Josephus,
in which a thousand rebels were slaughtered by the
Legionaries of Rome.
Possibly what’s happened here
is that
Mark has run a couple of different stories and locations together,
giving us the confusion we’ve inherited from the maps and
the manuscripts.
It doesn’t really matter, of course,
because
Mark isn’t writing history, he’s writing theology,
and the theology is clear enough wherever the story is set.
Jesus and his disciples cross the sea,
to the
region of the gentiles,
making the journey from promised land to compromised land,
from purity
to uncleanness,
from in, to out.
And what they find there is the demon possessed man,
living
amongst the tombs,
unable to
be bound,
and
self-harming in torment.
Today’s sermon isn’t a sermon about poor mental health,
but I do
just want to say at this point
that there will be those of us here this morning
who find
this story distressing,
because it records a level of self-hatred and harm
that will
resonate with our own experience.
Wherever people are victimised,
there is
the capacity for us to internalise and enact
the rejection we experience,
finding
ourselves compelled by forces we cannot control
into
actions that harm us, either individually or collectively.
And whilst I do not doubt that an encounter with Jesus
can open a
path to healing and wholeness,
for those
whose souls and minds are in torment,
I firmly believe that path includes appropriate medication
and talking therapy,
supported
by the prayerful love of the Christian community.
The key to understanding how Mark uses this story
to reveal
more of the person and ministry of Jesus
lies in the geography that we’ve already been paying
attention to.
The man is possessed by a demonic Legion,
which is
the word for a large military unit of the Roman army,
sometimes
as many as five or six thousand men,
but always
over a thousand.
And clearly, for Mark, the man is a metaphor,
for the
Roman military possession of the land.
The land given by God to the Jews to possess,
had been in
turn possessed by the Assyrians, the Babylonians,
the
Persians, the Greeks, and the Romans.
This is a story of possession going back centuries,
and the
demonic legions currently occupying the land
are just
the latest manifestation of a much greater and more enduring evil,
which is the cycle of oppression and domination
where one
group of humans possesses another.
We might dress it up as being about land, inheritance,
glory, and
divine right.
But ultimately this is a story about power.
Who has the power to possess another?
Whether the
‘other’ is a man living among the tombs,
or
the region of the Decapolis,
or
the nation of Israel,
or any
other people, tribe, or demographic,
which
finds itself dominated and oppressed.
This man isn’t just a metaphor for the land of Israel,
he’s a
metaphor for all possessed peoples anywhere.
This story unmasks all such dominating powers as satanic in
origin,
and this is
true whether we’re talking about one nation possessing another,
or an
ideology possessing an individual or a group of people.
From the lone suicide bomber,
to the
so-called just war,
acts of violence find their ultimate origin in evil,
as people
idolise dogma and the Legions march once again.
So, Jesus meets the man with the Legion of demons,
and the man
starts shouting at Jesus,
Mk. 5.7
"What have you to do with
me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God?
I adjure you by God, do not
torment me."
In an earlier sermon in our series on Mark,
I suggested
that the reason Jesus kept silencing the demons who tried to name him
was because
he didn’t want to accept titles
that
would align him with the Jewish system of purity legislation.
If part of Jesus’ strategy for bringing healing and
wholeness to the land and the people,
was the
casting out of the evils of exclusion,
and
by declaring to be clean that which was previously considered unclean,
the demonic
attempt to name Jesus as just another preacher of righteousness,
was
always an attempt to rob him of his power,
because it
aligned him with a religious system
that
had already demonstrated its failure
to bring
good news to those excluded, suffering, and marginalised.
So Jesus commands the demon to leave the man,
asking him
to give his name.
The demon then replies using both military and geographical
language:
Mk. 5.9-10 He replied, "My
name is Legion; for we are many."
And the Demon begged Jesus
earnestly not to send them out of the country.
At which point Jesus cast the legion of demons
into a
conveniently legion-sized herd of pigs,
which promptly rush into the sea and drown,
returning
the demonic legion to the waters of chaos.
And those of us who have a concern for animal welfare,
might well,
at this point, be somewhat miffed with Jesus
for solving
the problem by killing two thousand pigs.
It’s not easy to explain,
and I don’t
really think from a contemporary perspective it can be justified,
but there is a possibility that it may be understood….
From a Jewish purity law perspective,
pigs were
unclean animals.
They were not to be touched, or eaten.
But of course, we’re not in a Jewish area,
or at
least, not entirely.
We’re in the compromised land, remember, not the promised
land.
Here, people keep pigs,
in quite
large number it would seem.
The Jewish and Gentile population of the Decapolis
was
multi-cultural as well as multi-ethnic,
they were people who lived in the grey-area of compromise:
‘You like
bacon? Have bacon!’
‘You don’t
want bacon? Don’t have bacon!’
You get the idea.
It’s not
exactly modern metropolitan liberalism,
but it’s a
step in our direction.
But from a Jewish perspective,
and of
course Mark’s readership would have been predominantly Jewish,
this is the perfect end to the story:
the unclean
pigs get their comeuppance,
and there’s a not-so-subtle joke about Legionaries being
pigs.
We think that insulting the police in this way is relatively
modern,
but people
have been doing it for millennia.
Anyway, the man is now in his right mind,
the
possession is ended.
But the locals don’t seem very happy.
The local population now beg Jesus to leave,
primarily
because he’s just killed their pigs!
You can see their point.
From their
perspective, the compromised land is just fine,
and
the last thing they need is some Jewish ‘purity prophet’
coming
along with miraculous powers,
killing
their unclean herds
and
challenging who knows what else lucrative practices!
They don’t want a radical reformation,
they don’t
want some religio-political revolution.
They just want to be left alone.
And so they plead with Jesus,
begging him
to leave their neighbourhood.
They don’t want the legions gone,
they want
Jesus gone.
They are comfortable with their compromises,
they have
learned to survive under oppression,
and some of
them are even doing very well from the resident Legions.
The reason the man had not been healed before
was because
of the dysfunctional co-dependency that had been reached,
between his
suffering and the local economy.
He had become for them their convenient scape-goat,
the weird
man in the tombs, who was both scary and useful
they
bogeyman to keep the kids in check,
and
the person to blame when things went wrong.
But they didn’t want him gone,
any more
than they wanted the legions out of their land,
because just as they could scapegoat the man among the
tombs,
so they
could blame the occupying forces
for things
that they felt were beyond their control.
There is a strange resistance to freedom,
where those
who have been oppressed for so long
are scared
when the opportunity to be and live differently presents itself.
The locals haven’t grasped that the casting out of Legion
is good
news not just for the man,
but for everyone,
Jew and
Gentile alike.
And this is at the heart of what Mark is trying to tell us
about the
nature and ministry of Jesus.
Jesus, as we are discovering, isn’t just another
first-century Jewish purity-prophet,
he hasn’t embarked
on a mission to reinforce the boundary between ‘in’ and ‘out’,
or to
declare people ‘unclean’ and worthy of punishment.
Rather, he is playing a much deeper and more dangerous game,
by challenging
the very ideologies of exclusion
that create the context for people being possessed and
declared unclean in the first place.
So at the end of the story Jesus doesn’t silence the man,
rather he
sends him to tell everyone about the mercy God has shown him.
This man doesn’t need to be kept quiet,
because his
testimony is to the way Jesus has healed him,
by going
beyond the boundaries of national identity and religious purity,
and by
challenging the demonic powers that dominate and possess the land.
This is a revelation of God in Jesus,
who goes
where he is not even sought,
to bring
peace to those who don’t even recognise it as a desirable objective.
And so how do we hear this story in our world?
Where are the
powers of enshrined violence to be found?
Where are
the demons that Jesus would cast out?
Let’s name a few,
but there
are many more, because their names are Legion.
Racism is a demon.
Poverty is
a demon,
Powerlessness is a demon,
Homophobia
and Transphobia are demons,
Oppression is a demon,
Disempowerment
is a demon,
Hatred is a demon,
Self-righteousness
is a demon,
War is always a demon,
Any
ideology that ends in ‘ism’ can become a demon,
Lack of hospitality is a demon,
Denying the
image of God in another is a demon.
And I could go on, and on, and on….
but I’ll
leave each of us to write our own lists.
And as we do,
looking
deep in our hearts to the darkness that lies within,
sometimes, we may discover that we do not want our demons
gone,
because we
have got used to them,
or because
we have developed dysfunctional co-dependencies with them.
But the casting out of evil is always, in the end, good
news,
because how
else are we to be fully human before God?
1 comment:
This is a very fine dissection of a text that until now has been deeply problematic to me and I may well not have been the only one. Thank you.
Post a Comment