The choice of this reading is governed by the Gospel, which presents
Jesus as a prophet rejected by his own people. Ezekiel likewise was
sent to his own people and was warned that they might reject him.
This passage comes from the first of four different accounts of
Ezekiel’s call. He marks a new departure in Old Testament
prophecy.
Ever since the first prophet (Amos), the concept of the
“Spirit” had been avoided by the prophets. It was
originally too much associated with ecstatic prophecy and Baal
worship, but by Ezekiel’s time it could safely be brought out
and used, for by now it had been purified of its older, questionable
associations.
Henceforth, endowment with the Spirit will be a characteristic of
Yhwh’s prophets. Then it will pass into New Testament usage.
“Son of man” simply means “man”; it is not a
messianic title. It denotes a man in contrast to God, the human
bearer of the divine message.
Responsorial Psalm: 123:1-2, 2, 3-4
This is a community psalm. A representative of Israel pleads for
mercy on behalf of the whole community. What concrete situation is
envisaged is no longer determinable.
It is a beautiful cry for help (note especially
servant/ master, maid/mistressas parables of Israel’s
relation to Yhwh). But it is not easy to see precisely what
connection the psalm has with the reading from Ezekiel.
Perhaps the point lies in the final stanza, in which case it can be
taken as a lament on the part of the prophet that his message is
rejected and he receives nothing but contempt from his hearers
Reading II: 2 Corinthians 12:7-10
This passage is from the so-called severe or tearful letter (2 Cor 10-13), written at the height of Paul’s controversy over the false
apostles who were undermining his influence among the Corinthians.
It thus takes us back to an earlier stage in the story of
Paul’s relationship with the Corinthians than that envisaged
in the previous weeks’ readings.
Paul had been unfavorably contrasted with the false prophets, who
boasted of their ecstasies, visions, miracles, etc. The Apostle
replies that whenever he was tempted to preen himself like his
opponents, he was pulled up short by a “thorn in the
flesh” to keep him from being elated.
There has been much discussion about the precise meaning of
Paul’s affliction. The King James Version speaks of being
“buffeted” (the RSV “harass” is weak). This
has often been taken to imply epilepsy, whose convulsions would
throw him to the ground.
Others have deduced from
Galatians 4:14-15
that Paul had some sort of ophthalmic condition. The trouble is, as
Lietzmann remarked, that the patient has been dead for nineteen
hundred years! This makes diagnosis difficult.
The two references contradict each other and should probably be
taken metaphorically. The Galatians would have given Paul their most
valuable physical organs, that is, they would have done anything for
him in his illness. The sickness did not literally throw him to the
ground but left him depressed.
Karl Bonhoeffer, the father of Dietrich and a medical authority,
thought that it might have been chronic depression, a phenomenon
often accompanied by spells of supranormal activity. The elder
Bonhoeffer characterized it as the result of a “hyperrhythmic
temperament.” It seems safest to leave it at that.
Paul does not complain about it but uses it positively. It brings
home to him that the grace of God, and only that, is all he needs to
carry out his apostolic labors. His life is thus an epiphany of the
cross of Christ. That is what it means for him to be an apostle.
Once again we must try to reconstruct the history of this pericope.
It was claimed by the earlier form-critics that the whole episode
was constructed as a vehicle for the saying about the prophet being
honored everywhere except in his own country. But other features of
the story have a ring of historicity.
Jesus was more than a prophet to the early Christian community, and
therefore it is unlikely that they would have constructed a scene
for such a saying without modifying it in the light of their
post-Easter Christology.
The family relationships of Jesus also are surely based on
historical reminiscence. Moreover, it is unlikely that the
post-Easter Church would have recorded that Jesus could do
no mighty work in his hometown unless this had been the case.
So we may presume an authentic memory of an occasion when Jesus was
rejected in his own native town. The memory was then cast into
narrative form by the primitive community in order to reassure
itself when the kerygma was rejected by their own people. Their
Master had suffered a like fate.
Finally, Mark takes the story, adds
Mark 6:1
as an introductory link and verse 6b as a generalizing conclusion.
The exceptive qualification in verse
Mark 5:5b
has clearly been added to mitigate the offense in
Mark 6:5a, though it is unclear whether this addition was made by Mark or by
the pre-Marcan tradition.
By inserting this pericope in its present position (Luke has another
version of the same episode right at the beginning of the ministry),
Mark introduces one of his reminders of the impending passion into
the early part of his narrative (see
Mk 3:6, which, like this episode, also occurs at the end of a major
structural section of the Gospel).
Mark is thus telling his readers that Jesus was not merely a
successful wonder-worker; even his miraculous deeds led to his
rejection and to the cross.
|
Preaching the Lectionary: The Word of God for the Church Today Reginald H. Fuller and Daniel Westberg. Liturgical Press. 1984. (Revised Edition). |
 |
|
For more information about the 3rd edition (2006) of
Preaching the Lectionary click picture above.
|
from Religious Clip Art for the Liturgical Year (A, B, and C).
This art may be reproduced only by parishes who purchase the collection in book or CD-ROM form. For more information go http://www.ltp.org