There will always be poor people in
the land.
Jesus reported spoke similar words,
“The poor you will always have among you, but me only for a short time.”
(Matthew 26:11 - notice the fact that this comes as the 11th verse in both bibles is just coincidence!)
It is an interesting theological
exercise to try to imagine what the writer of the gospel was thinking when he
wrote these words. We know the verse occurs in the context of a woman anointing
Jesus’ head with expensive perfume and the disciples arguing that it was a
wasteful act. But the author reminds us that such things were done as a
preamble to Jesus’ own burial.
The plain exegetical sense of the
statement is hard to resist, especially when compared to its counterpart in Deuteronomy
15:11, another verse about money, the poor, and generosity.
Both verses tell us there will always
be poor. And if we interpret this literally, always means always. Really? But what
about the age of the messiah, when all wrongs will be righted and all people
will come to worship the one true God? Jesus doesn’t answer in this context,
and so as some Christian scurry to claim that the last part of this verse is
only in reference the end of his physical body (because, after all, Jesus is
God divine), they conveniently do some interpretive gymnastics with the first
part of the verse, consigning the always
to the course of history…but not Jesus whom they parcel out in two natures!
Again, it is helpful if we go to
Judaism and get an idea of what the Tannaim or Amoraim may have been thinking
at the time when they also read such a verse. An early tractate in the Talmud
called Berakhot, has an interesting
take on the verse. Folio 34B reads:
There
is no difference between this world and the days of the Messiah except the
oppression of the heathen kingdoms alone, as it is said, “For the poor shall
never cease from the land” (Deuteronomy 15:11)
So here we have the verse read as a gemara in a messianic context, precisely
the kind of thing we’d want to see if reading about Jesus the messiah.
Yet the tractate specifically says,
even in the time of them messiah, the poor will still be around. So is
inequality, injustice part of the messianic reign? They are other verses that
talk about an age of peace, but clearly the interpretive trend here was to read
the verse literally. It means that Jesus too read the verse literally, and so
to tag onto the second part of the verse, some rather forced sophistication
about the separation of the two natures of Jesus, the body and soul, feels
contrived to say the least. Jesus thought his end was coming. He thought he
would die. End of story.
But now we are free to return to our
theology!
If I interpret both ends of the verse
faithfully, Jesus would be saying that the poor will indeed always be here
insofar as the messianic age is concerned, and I will not. So, is he denying
his messianic call? Denying is a strong
accusation. If you are believer and looking to preserve the integrity of a
faithful understanding of the verse in the tradition of a systematic theology
that avoids problematic exegesis, one may simply plead that Jesus in the gospel
is ignorant of the incarnation. In the garden he seems to be rattled. He seems
to give up hope in various places, and in others seem sure about himself and
his mission.
Furthermore, this story is shadowed in
John at precisely the same time of his betrayal! In John, however, it is Judas,
not the disciples who talk about wasteful acts of charity and giving. In both
gospels Jesus rebukes them. John, where we would expect Jesus to say something
like “you will have me for a short time, but I will rise again” – at least I
this context, does not. I have a much easier time reading Matthew 26 without
doing exegetical stunts, then say if it had occurred in the gospel of John the
intermingling of Jesus’ two natures is obvious much more developed.
No comments:
Post a Comment