Begging, Touching, Healing, Growling
Preaching
Your Faith Has Made You Well
Preaching The Miracles
Miracle Three
Begging, Touching, Healing, Growling
The Text
A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, "If you choose, you can make me clean." Moved by pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, "I do choose. Be made clean!" Immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. After sternly warning him he sent him away at once, saying to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, as a testimony to them." But he went out and began to proclaim it freely, and to spread the word, so that Jesus could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country; and people came to him from every quarter.
Jesus' ministry is now all of two days old. Following his dramatic and potentially exhausting sabbath day, Jesus arises early the next day for prayer. The disciples inform him "Everyone (presumably the crowds of sick and demon-possessed) is searching for you." Jesus' work is not going to slow down! Jesus goes into the smaller towns around Capernaum (an inspiration for town and country pastors) to preach. The summary of Jesus' ministry in verse 39 includes preaching and exorcism, but not specifically healing.
Jesus' ministry in the countryside of Galilee is the setting for the healing in this passage, although the narrative does not include a time reference. Because Mark does not tell us that the healing of the leper happened on the day after the synagogue incident, the exact timing likely doesn't matter. The story itself helps us sharpen our understanding of Jesus' healing ministry. The account has many puzzling features, including some difficult choices to make in translation. We get more details than we did in the account of the healing of Simon's mother-in-law, but those details serve almost to make the story more difficult to interpret.
Background
Medical historians have reached a consensus that the leprosy mentioned in the Bible is not the Hansen's disease now known as leprosy. The leprosy in the Bible is a broad term including many different skin ailments, such as eczema, psoriasis, and seborrhea. Some of the skin conditions described in the Old Testament purity laws cannot be identified by contemporary science. These conditions caused great discomfort, but were not life threatening. Even though, historically, the conditions in the Bible are not true leprosy, in this discussion, I will refer to lepers and leprosy for the biblical accounts.1
As is well known, in the Old Testament people with skin diseases were considered unclean and were required to isolate themselves. This "uncleanness" was a ritual uncleanness and prevented the person from taking part in the religious life of the community. Leviticus 13-14 contains extensive instructions about the identification (one might say diagnosis) of the various skin ailments and treatment, and about the requirements for the person to be declared clean and returned to community life. The restrictions on people with skin diseases are especially poignant.
"The person who has the leprous disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head be disheveled; and he shall cover his upper lip and cry out, 'Unclean, unclean.' He shall remain unclean as long as he has the disease; he is unclean. He shall live alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp" (Leviticus 13:45-46).
As in the previous chapter, concerning fevers, leprosy in the Old Testament was often considered a punishment for sin. In Numbers 12, Miriam and Aaron criticize Moses because he married a Cushite woman. They boast that God speaks through them as well as through Moses. The Lord is angry with Aaron and Miriam and punishes Miriam with a condition that the narrator calls leprosy. Miriam's symptom is that her skin turns white. Aaron interprets her condition as a punishment and intervenes with the Lord on her behalf. Miriam is quarantined, and the people cannot continue their journey until she is clean again.
The story of Naaman in 2 Kings 5 demonstrates the Lord's grace and the assumption that leprosy was considered a punishment. Naaman, an officer in the Aramean army -- an enemy of Israel -- is a successful soldier but also a leper. An Israelite slave girl tells him to consult Elisha. Naaman reluctantly follows Elisha's advice to submerge himself in the Jordan River, but is healed of his leprosy when he does. This part of the story shows God's grace to a foreigner, one who is even hostile to Israel, the chosen people. (See Luke 4:27 for a New Testament interpretation of this story.) Gehazi, Elisha's assistant, decides to make a profit off of the healing, and deceitfully persuades Naaman to give him money. Elisha punishes Gehazi with leprosy.
Uzziah, the king of Israel, was also struck with leprosy as a punishment (2 Chronicles 26:16-21). Uzziah (called Amaziah in 2 Kings) was an ambiguous king. He did many good things, such as removing the "high places" used for idolatrous sacrifices, and making military and agricultural advancements. He also was impulsive and arrogant, and that led to his punishment with leprosy. Full of himself with his successes, he entered the temple to make an offering on the altar, which only priests were permitted to do. When confronted by the priests, Uzziah became angry. His anger and arrogance were punished with leprosy. The disease lasted the rest of his life, and he was forced to live in isolation, unable to enter the temple. His son, Jotham, ruled in his stead.
Literary Analysis
Before one can even begin to analyze this passage as a narrative, one must solve several problems of translation. These problems greatly affect how we understand the passage. The first of these matters is whether to include the word "kneeling" in verse 40 (see the footnote in the NRSV). If the leper did indeed kneel, he showed a posture of worship to Jesus. The manuscript evidence is mixed, but the use of the word is consistent with Mark's portrayal of people at this stage of his ministry. While Jesus is in "healing mode," people flock to him and treat him with respect.
The most serious translation problem in the passage is Jesus' initial emotional response to the leper's request. Some manuscripts say that Jesus is "moved with pity" toward the man (the position of the NRSV), while others say that Jesus is angry. Even today, translators are divided about how to translate the verse. I tend to agree with the translators who take the "angry" position. It is difficult to see why a scribe would have changed "pity" to "anger," but the reverse (changing anger to pity) is much more plausible. As will be discussed below, Jesus is not necessarily angry with the man.
Finally, in verse 43, Jesus "sternly warns" the man before sending him out (NRSV). The word for "sternly warn" is actually a Greek word that means to "growl" or "snort." This could be a further indication of Jesus' anger. It could also be a vestige from what originally was an exorcism account. We will explore below the implications of the connection between healing and demonic forces.
As a narrative, this account is quite dramatic, with more dialogue and intriguing developments than the account of the healing of Simon's mother-in-law. We don't know exactly when this incident took place, except that it was during Jesus' ministry in the Galilean countryside near Capernaum. Moving from verse 39 to verse 40, we go from the general to the specific. (The story in Mark's source may have originally had a different setting.)
The only two characters on stage are the leper and Jesus. The leper takes the initiative in approaching Jesus. His humble and respectful stance toward Jesus elicits our sympathy, as does his courage in approaching Jesus. We do not know what lies behind the leper's tentativeness in asking Jesus to heal him ("If you choose"). The leper's words assume that Jesus has the ability to heal; the question seems to be Jesus' willingness. Has Jesus given any indication of being selective in healing? Does the leper feel unworthy? Is he simply being polite? The answer may influence how we understand Jesus' anger in verse 41. Assuming that Jesus is not angry with the leper himself (for bothering him, or for implying that he healed selectively), with whom or what is Jesus angry? Is Jesus angry that the need is so great? Is Jesus angry that the isolation resulting from the purity laws has caused the man to devalue himself? (The Bible is not as concerned about "self-esteem" as we are.) The fact that Jesus violates the purity laws by touching the man suggests that perhaps he regarded them or their execution as oppressive. Jesus famously considered people's needs to be more important than the practice of the Sabbath laws. Whatever the focus of Jesus' anger, the reader of Mark gets some glimpse of Jesus' emotions and knows that the suffering of the world moves him to passion. Jesus' words and actions are congruent as he stretches out his hand (a detail that draws attention to Jesus' touch of the unclean leper), touches the man and then pronounces him clean.
After the healing itself, the story takes a curious turn. According to the Greek, Jesus "growls," and tells the man not to report the healing to anyone. Jesus instructs the man to go to the priests so that he can follow the prescribed cleansing ritual of the Mosaic Law. The NRSV interprets the growl as adding sternness to Jesus' warning about not reporting the healing to anyone. As suggested above, the growl may be the vestige of an exorcism story. More about that below. Despite everything -- Jesus' compassion and possible sternness -- the man does the exact opposite of what Jesus asks him to do. The character with whom we were so sympathetic at the beginning of the story lets Jesus down. The man's disobedience introduces the "messianic secret" in Mark. Jesus frequently tells people to keep quiet about his healings (see below). His disobedience also foreshadows the failure of every human character to understand and obey Jesus throughout the Gospel of Mark. Only at the crucifixion does the Centurion recognize Jesus as the Son of God. Even after the resurrection, the disciples are filled with fear.
By the end of the story, Jesus cannot go into the urban areas but must stay in the country to avoid the crowds. As the story progresses, the crowds become a frequent character in the narratives. This story highlights how Jesus is forced to adapt his ministry because of human foibles. At the end of the day on that first Sabbath, Jesus had to continue his healing ministry even after a trying day. Jesus' prayer time is interrupted the next day by the disciples looking for him. Now, Jesus must change his itinerary because the leper disobeyed him, leading to a crush of humanity in the urban areas.
Theological Reflection
Mark seems to make a distinction between healings and exorcisms. The man with the unclean spirit in 1:23 did not have an illness, and no symptoms were described. The summary of Jesus' ministry in 1:32-34 seems to differentiate between healing the sick and casting out demons. Nevertheless, the fact that the two are mentioned together so often is suggestive. Also, both the healing of Simon's mother-in-law and the healing of the leper contain some of the language of exorcism. The fever "left" Simon's mother-in-law. The leprosy "left" the man. Jesus "growled" after the exorcism. We should be careful in our interpretation of this connection. To Mark, the suffering, problems, and diseases of the world represent the demonic corruption of God's creation. The demonic can be an entity, as in 1:23ff, or it can be an inanimate illness, such as fever or leprosy. A responsible preacher would not say that every sick person has a "demon." Nevertheless, illness and impairment oppose God's will for the creation, and are, in that sense, demonic. We affirm the spiritual dimension to illness when we pray for the sick.
Mark emphasizes Jesus' touching the man. Touching a leper was considered a violation of Old Testament regulations. By touching the man, Jesus assumes a priestly authority to interpret the law. The goal of the law in both Judaism and Christianity is the proper ordering of communal and individual life. By touching the man, Jesus affirms that the law is life giving and reconciling.
Jesus' admonition to the man to "say nothing to anyone" is a classic example of what New Testament scholars call the "messianic secret." At times within the Gospel of Mark (and in Matthew and Luke), Jesus tells a person who has been healed to refrain from telling others of the healing. Also, Jesus tells the demons to keep quiet about his identity (see Mark 5:43 and 3:12; Matthew 12:6; Luke 4:41). Jesus' admonition to reticence is curious. One might assume that he is simply weary of the crowds, but they are already around him. One more report won't make that much difference. The most plausible explanation has been that the "messianic secret" is a literary device that makes an important theological point. Mark has Jesus seek to hide his identity as a healer and exorcist because Mark does not want people to overemphasize the miraculous to the exclusion of service, discipleship, and taking up the cross. By having Jesus tell the demons and those who were healed to keep his identity secret, Mark is hinting that we cannot really understand Jesus fully at this point in the gospel. Only when the reader confronts the cross and the call to take up our own cross can we understand Jesus fully. The healings are God's gift to the world and the manifestation of the coming near of the dominion of God. Nevertheless, those healings do not prevent the cross, but even contribute to the call for Jesus' death. Mark warns us away from accepting the gifts of grace and healing without fully understanding our call to take up our cross and follow Jesus.
The former leper's disobedience also instructs us theologically. As we have said before, the human characters in Mark do not fully understand Jesus. Jesus' opponents fail and the disciples fail. Even at the end of the gospel, the disciples are silent and afraid. God uses the disciples in spite of their failure. Here in this passage the man spreads the "word," a term in Mark for the proclamation of the good news (see 2:2). God's purposes prevail, in spite of human failure.
Pastoral Reading
Every pastor is familiar with people who are only too eager to ask for help. Expecting an inordinate amount of the pastor's time, they call constantly, drop by unannounced (either at the parsonage or the office) and just generally wear their neediness on their sleeves. This passage points out the other side of the coin: people who need help, but are reluctant to ask. If the leper's opening phrase to Jesus ("If you choose") reflects anxiety or any sense of unworthiness for healing, then the leper reminds us of those people. We must communicate that God's grace is open to all people, even society's outcasts. The more pastors can be in the community (a difficult task these days), and communicate availability, the more the ones who need help might be willing to come in. We have to set limits for the others.
The leper's problem was not just the discomfort of his skin condition, but his isolation from the community. Even Mark identifies him by his condition, and by no other characteristic. He was labeled unclean and had to shoo people away from himself. Researchers have discovered that social rejection is indeed physically painful. According to Naomi Eisenberger, "The shock and distress of this rejection (registers) in the same part of the brain, called the anterior cingulated cortex, that also responds to physical pain."2 Our preaching -- and our entire ministry -- should speak to broken hearts and loneliness.
The passage calls us to reflect on how we regard our skin. Our skin seems to matter to us more than we think. People tan or bleach their skin to make themselves more attractive. We separate ourselves based on skin color. A tattoo or body piercing can be a sign of rebellion, conformity, solidarity, or all three for different circles. Social scientists know that skin diseases are the basis for exclusion in many cultures. This passage raises the question of whether the way we divide ourselves based on our skin reflects a healthy Christian attitude.
Many people have commented on the similarities between lepers of Jesus' day and AIDS patients of today. That connection can still be made and should not be neglected. Just as the leper was the object of Jesus' care and compassion, including touch, so AIDS patients should be treated with care and concern and made to feel as welcome and comfortable as possible. The AIDS epidemic is on a devastating rampage within Africa, of course, and Western nations should seek to provide education to prevent the disease, and drugs to fight it.
Preaching Strategies
This passage presents at least three themes that deserve attention in preaching. The first is Jesus' acceptance of an outcast. The second is Jesus' passion about the man's condition. The third is God's use of the man's testimony.
Both Jesus and the man seem to violate the ritual purity laws of the Old Testament. The leper came to Jesus (although we do not know how close he got), even though he should have warned Jesus away from himself. As is often the case in the gospel healing stories, the man has nothing to lose by asking for Jesus' healing. Possibly, his life could not have gotten much worse. Almost certainly he was in pain and discomfort; absolutely he was lonely and isolated. In contrast, Jesus has much to lose by coming in contact with the man. Contact with a leper would render Jesus ritually unclean. Nevertheless, Jesus does not upbraid the man or chase him away. Even though Jesus does not need to touch him in order to heal him (see 3:5 as one of many examples of Jesus healing someone without touch), he does just that. Are we reading too much into the narrative to say that Jesus heals both his loneliness and his leprosy by touching him? The preacher could cite numerous examples of contemporary situations in which people feel isolated, lonely, or unwelcome. People with certain diseases, or social phobias are often isolated. People of Middle Eastern descent, or immigrants, in general, often feel unwelcome in the United States. Part of the way the church continues Jesus' ministry is to reach out to those who have been rejected.
Verse 41 is so ambiguous that one must be careful in using it for proclamation. That ambiguity is such a pity, because the verse is so powerful. Mark gives us a glimpse into Jesus' feelings, but we aren't quite sure which feeling! Is Jesus moved to pity because of the man's suffering? Is he angry that the demonic forces have the man under their control? Is Jesus angry that the legal tradition has left the man isolated? We can't answer these questions with any certainty. A precise answer would enhance our preaching. What we can affirm is that Jesus was passionate about the healing. That Jesus feels strong emotion about our situation is reassuring. Jesus is affected by the world's suffering. Even in the midst of crowds of people needing ministry (1:24), Jesus is moved by the man's plight.
After all that Jesus has done for the man, he still disobeys Jesus. Jesus tells him to go the priests, but he goes out preaching instead. As Mark puts it, he "spread the word," a technical term for proclamation. Throughout the Gospel of Mark, the disciples and other followers of Jesus always manage to do the wrong thing. Nevertheless, God's purposes prevail. God can incorporate our mistakes into God's purposes.
____________
1.ÊSee the article by David P. Wright and Richard N. Jones in David Noel Freedman, ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), s.v. "Leprosy."
2.ÊAOL news 10/9/03.
Begging, Touching, Healing, Growling
The Text
A leper came to him begging him, and kneeling he said to him, "If you choose, you can make me clean." Moved by pity, Jesus stretched out his hand and touched him, and said to him, "I do choose. Be made clean!" Immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. After sternly warning him he sent him away at once, saying to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, as a testimony to them." But he went out and began to proclaim it freely, and to spread the word, so that Jesus could no longer go into a town openly, but stayed out in the country; and people came to him from every quarter.
Jesus' ministry is now all of two days old. Following his dramatic and potentially exhausting sabbath day, Jesus arises early the next day for prayer. The disciples inform him "Everyone (presumably the crowds of sick and demon-possessed) is searching for you." Jesus' work is not going to slow down! Jesus goes into the smaller towns around Capernaum (an inspiration for town and country pastors) to preach. The summary of Jesus' ministry in verse 39 includes preaching and exorcism, but not specifically healing.
Jesus' ministry in the countryside of Galilee is the setting for the healing in this passage, although the narrative does not include a time reference. Because Mark does not tell us that the healing of the leper happened on the day after the synagogue incident, the exact timing likely doesn't matter. The story itself helps us sharpen our understanding of Jesus' healing ministry. The account has many puzzling features, including some difficult choices to make in translation. We get more details than we did in the account of the healing of Simon's mother-in-law, but those details serve almost to make the story more difficult to interpret.
Background
Medical historians have reached a consensus that the leprosy mentioned in the Bible is not the Hansen's disease now known as leprosy. The leprosy in the Bible is a broad term including many different skin ailments, such as eczema, psoriasis, and seborrhea. Some of the skin conditions described in the Old Testament purity laws cannot be identified by contemporary science. These conditions caused great discomfort, but were not life threatening. Even though, historically, the conditions in the Bible are not true leprosy, in this discussion, I will refer to lepers and leprosy for the biblical accounts.1
As is well known, in the Old Testament people with skin diseases were considered unclean and were required to isolate themselves. This "uncleanness" was a ritual uncleanness and prevented the person from taking part in the religious life of the community. Leviticus 13-14 contains extensive instructions about the identification (one might say diagnosis) of the various skin ailments and treatment, and about the requirements for the person to be declared clean and returned to community life. The restrictions on people with skin diseases are especially poignant.
"The person who has the leprous disease shall wear torn clothes and let the hair of his head be disheveled; and he shall cover his upper lip and cry out, 'Unclean, unclean.' He shall remain unclean as long as he has the disease; he is unclean. He shall live alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp" (Leviticus 13:45-46).
As in the previous chapter, concerning fevers, leprosy in the Old Testament was often considered a punishment for sin. In Numbers 12, Miriam and Aaron criticize Moses because he married a Cushite woman. They boast that God speaks through them as well as through Moses. The Lord is angry with Aaron and Miriam and punishes Miriam with a condition that the narrator calls leprosy. Miriam's symptom is that her skin turns white. Aaron interprets her condition as a punishment and intervenes with the Lord on her behalf. Miriam is quarantined, and the people cannot continue their journey until she is clean again.
The story of Naaman in 2 Kings 5 demonstrates the Lord's grace and the assumption that leprosy was considered a punishment. Naaman, an officer in the Aramean army -- an enemy of Israel -- is a successful soldier but also a leper. An Israelite slave girl tells him to consult Elisha. Naaman reluctantly follows Elisha's advice to submerge himself in the Jordan River, but is healed of his leprosy when he does. This part of the story shows God's grace to a foreigner, one who is even hostile to Israel, the chosen people. (See Luke 4:27 for a New Testament interpretation of this story.) Gehazi, Elisha's assistant, decides to make a profit off of the healing, and deceitfully persuades Naaman to give him money. Elisha punishes Gehazi with leprosy.
Uzziah, the king of Israel, was also struck with leprosy as a punishment (2 Chronicles 26:16-21). Uzziah (called Amaziah in 2 Kings) was an ambiguous king. He did many good things, such as removing the "high places" used for idolatrous sacrifices, and making military and agricultural advancements. He also was impulsive and arrogant, and that led to his punishment with leprosy. Full of himself with his successes, he entered the temple to make an offering on the altar, which only priests were permitted to do. When confronted by the priests, Uzziah became angry. His anger and arrogance were punished with leprosy. The disease lasted the rest of his life, and he was forced to live in isolation, unable to enter the temple. His son, Jotham, ruled in his stead.
Literary Analysis
Before one can even begin to analyze this passage as a narrative, one must solve several problems of translation. These problems greatly affect how we understand the passage. The first of these matters is whether to include the word "kneeling" in verse 40 (see the footnote in the NRSV). If the leper did indeed kneel, he showed a posture of worship to Jesus. The manuscript evidence is mixed, but the use of the word is consistent with Mark's portrayal of people at this stage of his ministry. While Jesus is in "healing mode," people flock to him and treat him with respect.
The most serious translation problem in the passage is Jesus' initial emotional response to the leper's request. Some manuscripts say that Jesus is "moved with pity" toward the man (the position of the NRSV), while others say that Jesus is angry. Even today, translators are divided about how to translate the verse. I tend to agree with the translators who take the "angry" position. It is difficult to see why a scribe would have changed "pity" to "anger," but the reverse (changing anger to pity) is much more plausible. As will be discussed below, Jesus is not necessarily angry with the man.
Finally, in verse 43, Jesus "sternly warns" the man before sending him out (NRSV). The word for "sternly warn" is actually a Greek word that means to "growl" or "snort." This could be a further indication of Jesus' anger. It could also be a vestige from what originally was an exorcism account. We will explore below the implications of the connection between healing and demonic forces.
As a narrative, this account is quite dramatic, with more dialogue and intriguing developments than the account of the healing of Simon's mother-in-law. We don't know exactly when this incident took place, except that it was during Jesus' ministry in the Galilean countryside near Capernaum. Moving from verse 39 to verse 40, we go from the general to the specific. (The story in Mark's source may have originally had a different setting.)
The only two characters on stage are the leper and Jesus. The leper takes the initiative in approaching Jesus. His humble and respectful stance toward Jesus elicits our sympathy, as does his courage in approaching Jesus. We do not know what lies behind the leper's tentativeness in asking Jesus to heal him ("If you choose"). The leper's words assume that Jesus has the ability to heal; the question seems to be Jesus' willingness. Has Jesus given any indication of being selective in healing? Does the leper feel unworthy? Is he simply being polite? The answer may influence how we understand Jesus' anger in verse 41. Assuming that Jesus is not angry with the leper himself (for bothering him, or for implying that he healed selectively), with whom or what is Jesus angry? Is Jesus angry that the need is so great? Is Jesus angry that the isolation resulting from the purity laws has caused the man to devalue himself? (The Bible is not as concerned about "self-esteem" as we are.) The fact that Jesus violates the purity laws by touching the man suggests that perhaps he regarded them or their execution as oppressive. Jesus famously considered people's needs to be more important than the practice of the Sabbath laws. Whatever the focus of Jesus' anger, the reader of Mark gets some glimpse of Jesus' emotions and knows that the suffering of the world moves him to passion. Jesus' words and actions are congruent as he stretches out his hand (a detail that draws attention to Jesus' touch of the unclean leper), touches the man and then pronounces him clean.
After the healing itself, the story takes a curious turn. According to the Greek, Jesus "growls," and tells the man not to report the healing to anyone. Jesus instructs the man to go to the priests so that he can follow the prescribed cleansing ritual of the Mosaic Law. The NRSV interprets the growl as adding sternness to Jesus' warning about not reporting the healing to anyone. As suggested above, the growl may be the vestige of an exorcism story. More about that below. Despite everything -- Jesus' compassion and possible sternness -- the man does the exact opposite of what Jesus asks him to do. The character with whom we were so sympathetic at the beginning of the story lets Jesus down. The man's disobedience introduces the "messianic secret" in Mark. Jesus frequently tells people to keep quiet about his healings (see below). His disobedience also foreshadows the failure of every human character to understand and obey Jesus throughout the Gospel of Mark. Only at the crucifixion does the Centurion recognize Jesus as the Son of God. Even after the resurrection, the disciples are filled with fear.
By the end of the story, Jesus cannot go into the urban areas but must stay in the country to avoid the crowds. As the story progresses, the crowds become a frequent character in the narratives. This story highlights how Jesus is forced to adapt his ministry because of human foibles. At the end of the day on that first Sabbath, Jesus had to continue his healing ministry even after a trying day. Jesus' prayer time is interrupted the next day by the disciples looking for him. Now, Jesus must change his itinerary because the leper disobeyed him, leading to a crush of humanity in the urban areas.
Theological Reflection
Mark seems to make a distinction between healings and exorcisms. The man with the unclean spirit in 1:23 did not have an illness, and no symptoms were described. The summary of Jesus' ministry in 1:32-34 seems to differentiate between healing the sick and casting out demons. Nevertheless, the fact that the two are mentioned together so often is suggestive. Also, both the healing of Simon's mother-in-law and the healing of the leper contain some of the language of exorcism. The fever "left" Simon's mother-in-law. The leprosy "left" the man. Jesus "growled" after the exorcism. We should be careful in our interpretation of this connection. To Mark, the suffering, problems, and diseases of the world represent the demonic corruption of God's creation. The demonic can be an entity, as in 1:23ff, or it can be an inanimate illness, such as fever or leprosy. A responsible preacher would not say that every sick person has a "demon." Nevertheless, illness and impairment oppose God's will for the creation, and are, in that sense, demonic. We affirm the spiritual dimension to illness when we pray for the sick.
Mark emphasizes Jesus' touching the man. Touching a leper was considered a violation of Old Testament regulations. By touching the man, Jesus assumes a priestly authority to interpret the law. The goal of the law in both Judaism and Christianity is the proper ordering of communal and individual life. By touching the man, Jesus affirms that the law is life giving and reconciling.
Jesus' admonition to the man to "say nothing to anyone" is a classic example of what New Testament scholars call the "messianic secret." At times within the Gospel of Mark (and in Matthew and Luke), Jesus tells a person who has been healed to refrain from telling others of the healing. Also, Jesus tells the demons to keep quiet about his identity (see Mark 5:43 and 3:12; Matthew 12:6; Luke 4:41). Jesus' admonition to reticence is curious. One might assume that he is simply weary of the crowds, but they are already around him. One more report won't make that much difference. The most plausible explanation has been that the "messianic secret" is a literary device that makes an important theological point. Mark has Jesus seek to hide his identity as a healer and exorcist because Mark does not want people to overemphasize the miraculous to the exclusion of service, discipleship, and taking up the cross. By having Jesus tell the demons and those who were healed to keep his identity secret, Mark is hinting that we cannot really understand Jesus fully at this point in the gospel. Only when the reader confronts the cross and the call to take up our own cross can we understand Jesus fully. The healings are God's gift to the world and the manifestation of the coming near of the dominion of God. Nevertheless, those healings do not prevent the cross, but even contribute to the call for Jesus' death. Mark warns us away from accepting the gifts of grace and healing without fully understanding our call to take up our cross and follow Jesus.
The former leper's disobedience also instructs us theologically. As we have said before, the human characters in Mark do not fully understand Jesus. Jesus' opponents fail and the disciples fail. Even at the end of the gospel, the disciples are silent and afraid. God uses the disciples in spite of their failure. Here in this passage the man spreads the "word," a term in Mark for the proclamation of the good news (see 2:2). God's purposes prevail, in spite of human failure.
Pastoral Reading
Every pastor is familiar with people who are only too eager to ask for help. Expecting an inordinate amount of the pastor's time, they call constantly, drop by unannounced (either at the parsonage or the office) and just generally wear their neediness on their sleeves. This passage points out the other side of the coin: people who need help, but are reluctant to ask. If the leper's opening phrase to Jesus ("If you choose") reflects anxiety or any sense of unworthiness for healing, then the leper reminds us of those people. We must communicate that God's grace is open to all people, even society's outcasts. The more pastors can be in the community (a difficult task these days), and communicate availability, the more the ones who need help might be willing to come in. We have to set limits for the others.
The leper's problem was not just the discomfort of his skin condition, but his isolation from the community. Even Mark identifies him by his condition, and by no other characteristic. He was labeled unclean and had to shoo people away from himself. Researchers have discovered that social rejection is indeed physically painful. According to Naomi Eisenberger, "The shock and distress of this rejection (registers) in the same part of the brain, called the anterior cingulated cortex, that also responds to physical pain."2 Our preaching -- and our entire ministry -- should speak to broken hearts and loneliness.
The passage calls us to reflect on how we regard our skin. Our skin seems to matter to us more than we think. People tan or bleach their skin to make themselves more attractive. We separate ourselves based on skin color. A tattoo or body piercing can be a sign of rebellion, conformity, solidarity, or all three for different circles. Social scientists know that skin diseases are the basis for exclusion in many cultures. This passage raises the question of whether the way we divide ourselves based on our skin reflects a healthy Christian attitude.
Many people have commented on the similarities between lepers of Jesus' day and AIDS patients of today. That connection can still be made and should not be neglected. Just as the leper was the object of Jesus' care and compassion, including touch, so AIDS patients should be treated with care and concern and made to feel as welcome and comfortable as possible. The AIDS epidemic is on a devastating rampage within Africa, of course, and Western nations should seek to provide education to prevent the disease, and drugs to fight it.
Preaching Strategies
This passage presents at least three themes that deserve attention in preaching. The first is Jesus' acceptance of an outcast. The second is Jesus' passion about the man's condition. The third is God's use of the man's testimony.
Both Jesus and the man seem to violate the ritual purity laws of the Old Testament. The leper came to Jesus (although we do not know how close he got), even though he should have warned Jesus away from himself. As is often the case in the gospel healing stories, the man has nothing to lose by asking for Jesus' healing. Possibly, his life could not have gotten much worse. Almost certainly he was in pain and discomfort; absolutely he was lonely and isolated. In contrast, Jesus has much to lose by coming in contact with the man. Contact with a leper would render Jesus ritually unclean. Nevertheless, Jesus does not upbraid the man or chase him away. Even though Jesus does not need to touch him in order to heal him (see 3:5 as one of many examples of Jesus healing someone without touch), he does just that. Are we reading too much into the narrative to say that Jesus heals both his loneliness and his leprosy by touching him? The preacher could cite numerous examples of contemporary situations in which people feel isolated, lonely, or unwelcome. People with certain diseases, or social phobias are often isolated. People of Middle Eastern descent, or immigrants, in general, often feel unwelcome in the United States. Part of the way the church continues Jesus' ministry is to reach out to those who have been rejected.
Verse 41 is so ambiguous that one must be careful in using it for proclamation. That ambiguity is such a pity, because the verse is so powerful. Mark gives us a glimpse into Jesus' feelings, but we aren't quite sure which feeling! Is Jesus moved to pity because of the man's suffering? Is he angry that the demonic forces have the man under their control? Is Jesus angry that the legal tradition has left the man isolated? We can't answer these questions with any certainty. A precise answer would enhance our preaching. What we can affirm is that Jesus was passionate about the healing. That Jesus feels strong emotion about our situation is reassuring. Jesus is affected by the world's suffering. Even in the midst of crowds of people needing ministry (1:24), Jesus is moved by the man's plight.
After all that Jesus has done for the man, he still disobeys Jesus. Jesus tells him to go the priests, but he goes out preaching instead. As Mark puts it, he "spread the word," a technical term for proclamation. Throughout the Gospel of Mark, the disciples and other followers of Jesus always manage to do the wrong thing. Nevertheless, God's purposes prevail. God can incorporate our mistakes into God's purposes.
____________
1.ÊSee the article by David P. Wright and Richard N. Jones in David Noel Freedman, ed. The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1992), s.v. "Leprosy."
2.ÊAOL news 10/9/03.
