A lot of my friends have gotten married recently, which I guess is a sign that I am at that point in life where an incurable case of adulthood is setting in. At first, when Jesus used wedding imagery to explain the concept of fasting, I was more than a little confused. And yet, having seen so many of my friends and their fiances prepare for weddings, I think I understand now the point that Jesus was trying to make. In essence, fasting is a means to an end. If you know a girl who is engaged, then you probably know a girl on a diet. I have heard it referred to as the wedding dress diet, among other things. The months leading up to the wedding are spent in physical preparation. More than likely, the bride has bought a dress that is a little too small, so that every time she sees that several hundred (or more than likely several thousand) dollars hanging there in her closet, she will find renewed motivation to lose a few pounds. She wants to look her very best for that special day. If, on the day of her wedding, that bride refused to eat or drink anything at the reception, people would think she was crazy. She did all that dieting BEFORE the wedding so that she could look her best, and fully enjoy the wedding itself. The wedding is a distinctly different context than the time leading up to the wedding. The scribes who challenge Jesus and his disciples regarding their fasting practices are making a category mistake, they have failed to recognize that the wedding day has indeed arrived. When we understand the discussion about fasting in this light, Jesus' comments about the patch and the wineskins make a lot more sense. Jesus has brought something new into the world. Just as we wouldn't mix old and new fabric, or put new wine into old wineskins, neither should we try to interpret Jesus actions through old categories and try to force Him to conform to the "old" way of doing things. Jesus has begun something new on the earth, and our ability to recognize that will ultimately determine whether we are able to truly embrace this new work of God among us.
It is a quick, and yet appropriate transition to go from the topic of fasting to the topic of feasting. The Pharisees go from questioning Jesus and his disciples about their fasting methods, to questioning them about how they eat. Perhaps the Pharisees call to mind certain religious people you have met, whose primary religious experience seems to be to critique the religious experience of others. The tragic irony of the Pharisees is that they were so tied up in the knowledge and keeping of their own law, that they failed to know their own story. As Jesus points out to them, his disciples are not the first men to "break the rules" in order to satisfy their hunger. David and his men did far more than pluck some grain on the Sabbath, they actually ate the Bread of Presence reserved only for the priest! If God was willing to let something like that slide, do you really think he is concerned about a few heads of grain being plucked on the Sabbath? Again, the Pharisees have made a critical error in assessing the situation. Earlier they tried to use old categories to interpret this new thing that Jesus was bringing about in His ministry. Here, they forget the simple fact that the rules were not made to enslave humankind, but rather to liberate it. The rules were given to us so that we would know how to interact with each other, and with God. It reminds me of an incident that happened at Clemson University a few years ago. One of the football players came from a very bad home where his mother was addicted to drugs. After he left to go to school, things destabilized even further and he decided that it was unsafe for his younger brother to stay in that environment any longer. He brought him up to Clemson to live with him, but ran into a problem. NCAA rules prohibited him from getting a job to support his brother, and he was forbidden from receiving any aid from those in the Clemson community. To receive aid, whether it was canned goods, some cash to buy groceries, or even some used clothes, would be seen as an improper benefit. Thankfully ESPN got word of the situation, and ran a story that in essence shamed the NCAA into making an exception to the rules in the instance of this young man. The rules had been created for a good reason; to protect student athletes and to ensure fair competition. However, in being so rigid and legalistic the NCAA was actually using the rules to harm this football player and his brother. It begs the question, how do we use the rules? Do we see them as a blessing and a means of protecting ourselves and others, or do we wield them as a weapon with which to judge and harm others? How we answer will determine whether we look more like Jesus, or one of his opponents.
No comments:
Post a Comment