The Gospel According to a Personal View Owen O'sullivan OFM Cap

The Gospel according to MARK: a personal view Owen O’Sullivan OFM Cap. 1 © Owen O’Sullivan OFM Cap., 2007. 2 The Gospel according to MARK: a personal view Contents Page Preface iv Sources used v Introduction 1 Main Text 6 3 Preface I was stationed in the Catholic parish of Christ the Redeemer, in Lagmore, West Belfast, Northern Ireland, between 2001 and 2007. When the liturgical year 2005-06 began on the first Sunday of Advent, 27 November 2005, with the Gospel of Mark as the Sunday Gospel, I decided to begin a study of it, in order to learn more about it and understand it better, and, hopefully, to be able to preach better on it at Sunday Mass. I also hoped that this study would be of benefit to me in my faith. It was never on my mind, then or now, that it be published. It is not good enough for that. I have had no formal training in scripture studies, other than what I learned in preparing for the priesthood. Mostly, it has been a matter of what I learned in later years from reflection in daily prayer and personal study, of which I did a good deal. It took me more than a year to complete the study of Mark, but I found that it carried me along, and I wanted to bring it to completion. I was glad to be able to do that early in 2007. The finished product I printed and bound principally for my own use, simply to make it 4 easier to refer to for study or preaching. If it benefits anyone else, that is a welcome bonus. Owen O‟Sullivan OFM Cap. 5 Sources used Bibles Except where otherwise noted, the New Revised Standard Version of the Holy Bible (Geoffrey Chapman, London, 1993), is the text used in this book. The Jerusalem Bible, Darton, Longman and Todd, London, 1966. The Holy Bible, Douai Version, Wm. Egan & Sons, Cork, Ireland, 1953. Reference Works Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture {CCHS}, Nelson, London, 1975, especially the section by Henry Wansborough OSB, nn.744a- 763e. The Jerome Biblical Commentary, Geoffrey Chapman, London, 1970, especially the section by Edward J. Mally SJ, no.42. Xavier-Léon Dufour, Dictionary of Biblical Theology, Geoffrey Chapman, London, 1965. John L. McKenzie S.J., Dictionary of the Bible, Geoffrey Chapman, London, 1976. Other Works Raymond E. Brown SS, Jesus, God and Man: Modern Biblical Reflections, Chapman, London, 1968. 6 C. H. Dodd, The Parables of the Kingdom, Fontana Books, London, 1969. Roger Haight SJ, Jesus: Symbol of God, Orbis Books, New York 10545, 2005, especially pp.159-163. Wilfrid J. Harrington O. P., Mark: Realistic Theologian, Columba Press, Dublin, 1996. Joachim Jeremias, Rediscovering the Parables, SCM Press, London, 1966. Luke Timothy Johnston, The Real Jesus, Harper, San Francisco, 1997. Dermot A. Lane, The Reality of Jesus, Veritas, Dublin, 1975. Enda Lyons, Jesus: Self-Portrait by God, Columba, Dublin, 1994. José Antonio Pagola, JESUS - An Historical Approximation, Convivium Press, 2009. F. J. Sheed, What difference does Jesus make? Sheed and Ward, London, 1971. Note (v.) is the abbreviation for verse, vv. for verses. 7 The Gospel of MARK: a personal view Introduction Mark is commonly identified with the John Mark of Acts (12.12, 25; 15.37, 39, and 1 Peter 5.13), who lived in Jerusalem, and accompanied Barnabas, his cousin (Colossians 4.10), and Paul on their first missionary journey. He may have been a prisoner with Paul in Rome. The gospel which bears his name does not state who wrote it, and the ascription to Mark comes from tradition. John is a Jewish forename, while Mark is a Greek surname. Described as a disciple and possible interpreter of Peter‟s, Mark nonetheless gives Peter no greater prominence than do Matthew or Luke. Mark was probably a Greek-speaking Jew from the Jerusalem area. Mark wrote in Greek, in a style which was basic, but vivid and detailed; he likes statistics. A skilful writer, he knows how to select material, to edit it for his own purpose, and to place it for greatest effect. He uses a “sandwich” technique in which he brackets a story between two others for special effect. He in-builds mnemonics for ease of memorization. But he is regarded as not having been an eye-witness to the events he describes; his references to Palestinian geography are sometimes inaccurate. Unlike Matthew, he is 8 not greatly concerned to establish links with the Hebrew bible (the Old Testament), and some of his attempts to do so are unconvincing. He writes neither a biography, nor a history but a gospel, that is, a work of faith addressed to faith. He is not interested in chronological sequence, nor accuracy in reporting events as a reporter might be expected to write them up. Mark‟s is the earliest of the four gospels, written after Peter‟s death, probably between 65 and 70. It was used as a source by Matthew and Luke, so it seems that it must have been regarded as faithful to the original preaching of the apostles about Jesus. Mark drew on existing traditions, both written and oral, from the community of faith before him, perhaps in and around Jerusalem, with Peter perhaps being prominent among his sources. According to Papias, Mark, who was Peter‟s interpreter and close associate, his “son” (1 Peter 5.13), wrote down Peter‟s sermons and they became the basis of his Gospel. His audience was probably one of Gentile Christians, unfamiliar with Jewish customs, and living either in Rome or Roman territory; so Mark explains Jewish words and customs. His readers were people of the second generation of Christians who needed a written record, as the original eye-witnesses were dying off. Probably with their interests in mind, Mark writes with a universalist perspective, taking care to include Gentiles in Jesus‟ mission. He omits 9 an account of Jesus‟ birth or early years, but, with characteristic brevity, sees the opening thirteen verses as adequately setting the scene. Jesus is there depicted as both royal Messiah and Suffering Servant. Although Mark begins his gospel, saying, „the beginning of the good news of Jesus Christ, the Son of God‟ (1.1), he clearly shows Jesus as a man. He is not afraid of the humanity of Jesus, as if it should be down-played in order to highlight his divinity. The matter is not an either-or, but both. For Mark, Jesus, the carpenter from Nazareth, is the human face and presence of God. He presents a picture of Jesus, who, after an initially enthusiastic response, loses support when people came to see, and be disappointed, that his mission was not that of a political liberator who would drive out the Romans and restore the kingdom of Israel. Mark focuses on why Jesus, although neither understood not accepted, was nonetheless truly God‟s messenger who carried out his mission. For Mark, Jesus is the crucified Messiah. He contrasts the recognition and acceptance of Jesus by God, devils, angels, and many ordinary people, with his being misunderstood by his relatives and disciples, and opposed by the religious authorities. While the resurrection of Jesus is God‟s ultimate answer to Jesus‟ opponents, their opposition is itself used by God to fulfil the scriptures. The way of Jesus, that of humility and 10 suffering, is in contrast to the prevailing Jewish hopes of a triumphant warrior-king. Mark‟s gospel is organized around the idea that, in order to understand the parables, sayings, and teachings of Jesus, one must accept him as the one sent by God, destined to be rejected, to suffer, to die, and to be raised to life again by God. There is a significant turning-point around this theme in 8.27-30. To understand Jesus, and what it means to follow him, his disciples must understand and accept that his way is one of suffering. Unlike Matthew and Luke, who devote much space to Jesus‟ teaching, Mark‟s primary concern in the first part of his gospel, that is, up to 8.26, is with the miracles of Jesus; they point to the coming of God‟s rule. They are meant to answer the question about Jesus, „Who then is this?‟ (4.41) He cites many “works of power” by him, especially exorcisms, in which evil spirits proclaim him as Son of God. He presents Jesus as a prophet, healer, exorcist, teacher, the messiah whom he identifies with the Suffering Servant of God, and, especially, as Son of God who will suffer, die, and rise again. In Mark, the mission of Jesus is to die and to rise. For him, what matters is that Jesus was the Messiah, the Suffering Servant of God, the Son of God, who proclaimed the kingdom, taught, 11 worked wonders, suffered, died, and rose. These events were historical and saving. A secondary theme is that of the kingdom of God which Mark sees as a future reality; it has been called Jesus‟ resistance movement to the prevailing standards of the world. The “messianic secret” is an important theme in Mark‟s gospel. During his public ministry, Jesus did not claim to be Messiah, but neither did he deny that he was. The only title he claimed was that of Son of Man, a title which essentially means „a man‟. He concealed his identity as Messiah until late (see 14.61b-62), probably because of the mistaken hopes it would arouse of his being a political messiah who would drive out the Romans and re-establish the kingdom of Israel.

Load more