the cleansing of the leper (Mark 1: 40-45, Matthew 8:1-4 and Luke 5:12-16)
Introduction
The gospels are replete with instances of the healing
and miracle activities of Jesus Christ. From Nazareth to Jerusalem, Jesus is
seen meeting to both the spiritual and physical needs of men and women,
sometimes uninvited, but most times out of a display of faith of the one(s) who
sought his help. It is one of these healing activities of Jesus that this paper
seeks to explore, namely, the cleansing of the leper. The story of the
cleansing of the leper is contained in all three of the synoptic gospels (Mark 1:
40-45, Matthew 8:1-4 and Luke 5:12-16). I find the story very interesting and
laden with many lessons both for the individual and for the community of
Christ’s faithful, the church. For an effective exploration of this story we
shall adopt the following plan: first, we shall examine the literary context of
the story; thereafter, we shall carry out an exegesis on the story. We shall
also consider the theological implications of the story. Afterwards, we shall
attempt a conclusion.
Literary Context
The literary context is important basically because
words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs have no specific meaning apart from a
specific context.[1]
In the light of this, we shall examine the context in which the story of the
cleansing of the leper took place. We shall examine both the immediate context
and the larger context. The immediate examines what comes before and what comes
after our chosen pericope. The Gospel according to Mark presents the story as
occurring the day, after Christ had cured Peter’s mother-in-law of her fever
and had cured many that were brought to him for healing. It is interesting to
note that the cleansing of the leper rounds off the first chapter of the Gospel
according to Mark, as if to say that the summary of the mission of Christ was
nothing more than to give succour to the broken hearted and to the abandoned of
the society. The story after the story of the cleansing of the leper is also
one of healing. Here, Mark shows Jesus healing a paralytic. Jesus however is
seen as going a step further to reveal his divinity, by granting forgiveness to
the paralytic. A careful analysis of the immediate contest of our pericope would
show that the story of the cleansing of the leper is situated together with other
healing activities of Jesus. Matthew presents the story of the cleansing of the
leper as the first action of Jesus after his long sermon on the mountain. This
is significant because it would see Jesus putting into action the sermon he had
given on the mountain. The healing of the centurion’s servant is presented as
immediately following the cleansing of the leper. Unlike Mark, Matthew
presented the cure of Peter’s mother-in-law as the second story following the
story of the cleansing of the leper. Other important points to highlight is the
fact that first, the story of the cleansing of the leper begins the eighth chapter
of the Gospel according to Matthew, second, this same chapter contains other healing
activates of Jesus Christ. Luke presents the call of the first four disciples
of Jesus before the story of the cleansing of the leper. This is instructive
because it can be said to mean that Jesus, by his action of healing, was already
preparing the disciples he had just called to come to the knowledge of who he
truly is. Luke, like Mark, presents the cure of a paralytic as immediately
following the cleansing of the leper. The story is thus situated between Jesus’
call of his first four disciples and a practical demonstration of the love,
mercy and power of Jesus. Having been called, they were to go out and do as
they see their master do. But the above presentation does not fully capture all
there is about literary context. We need to examine the larger context of our
periscope. The cleansing of the leper is situated on a large scale within the
Galilean ministry of Jesus Christ. Here, Jesus is seen as going through the
various parts of Galilee proclaiming the good news of the kingdom of God, by
both his words and actions. Through his actions of love and mercy he went about
curing diseases of all kinds, giving hope to all in need. The cleansing of the
leper is thus one of the many acts of mercy and love of Jesus.
Exegesis
The first thing we notice in the
story of the cleansing of the leper is that the place where the healing
occurred was not mentioned in all three of the synoptic Gospels. While Matthew
noted that the miracle happened when Jesus came down from the mount after his
sermon, Luke noted that he was in a certain town. Mark went straight to present
the leper approaching Jesus and pleading to be cured.[2]
Furthermore, all three synoptic Gospels presented the man as suffering from a skin
disease, although Mark and Mathew gave a further emphasis by adding “virulent”. However, biblical leprosy is distinct
from current day understanding of leprosy (Hansen’s disease). Biblical leprosy
was a combination of various skin problems that isolated the leper from the
society.[3] But
why was the leper isolated from the society? That was so because biblical
leprosy was like a living death, the patients were supposed to wear
torn clothing, live outside the community, were forbidden to enter a dwelling
place, and had to cry “unclean, unclean” if approached by people.[4] Leviticus
13 and 14 present us with the nature and rituals of purification for leprosy.[5] Sufferers
were not allowed to have contact with people, including their family and
friends. If a leper touched an animal, the animal had to be killed, they kept
away from all religious ritual observances and carried out his religious obligations by means of others
acting for him. They were excluded .from the temple and considered permanently
unclean.[6] Furthermore,
biblical leprosy had multiple dimensions, namely, medical, religious financial, social
and spiritual. The religious dimension pertains to the fact that sufferers of
leprosy were regarded as ritually unclean. Socially, they lived alone, out of
the community. Financially, they were unable to work and thus resorted to
begging. Medically, the disease was communicable and so sufferers were
refrained from mingling with other people. Spiritually, anyone who was touched
by the sufferer becomes unclean too.[7]
The three synoptic evangelists record that the man
with leprosy approached Jesus, but while Mark noted that he pleaded on his
knees, Mathew noted that he bowed low and Luke noted that he fell on his face.
These differences notwithstanding, it is obvious that the man displayed a high
sense of respect for Jesus by reason of his conduct when he approached him. The
man made his plea: “if you will, you can cleanse me”. Matthew adds “Lord” while
Luke adds “Sir”, Mark adds nothing to it. This plea shows not whether Jesus is
able to heal, but whether he is willing to heal this leper. The leper was not
sure if Jesus will be willing to attend to the needs of one who is ritually
unclean and excluded from society.[8]
Jesus showed his willingness to heal him, he stretched out his hand and touched
him and spoke the words of healing to him. The first point we can deduce from
this is that Jesus broke the law of the Jews by touching the leper. He was not
afraid of being unclean. Secondly, only Mark captured the emotion displayed by
Jesus; he was moved with pity, with compassion.[9] Furthermore,
all three synoptic Gospels captured Jesus telling the man to tell no one what
had happened to him, but rather to go and show himself to the priest and offer
the required offerings. But why should the leper not tell people what had
happened to him? Well, it is most likely that Jesus was trying to avoid public
attention, since the time for passion was not near yet. Jesus asked the man to go and show himself to
the priest most probably because in order for the man to be restored back to
the society it was necessary that the priestly rituals be observed since the
cure qas not just regarded as being physical but also spiritual.[10]
This instruction to show oneself to the priest also showed Jesus’ devotion to
the Torah.[11]
All three of the synoptic Gospels ended the instruction of Jesus to the man
with “as evidence to them”. This could mean either of or both of two things:
testimony to the healing power of Jesus and/or a testimony that the former
leper is now accepted back in the society.[12]
Mark alone presented the man’s disobedience to the directive of Jesus, as he went
about telling people what had happened to him. Luke alone states that the news
of Jesus went round but did not tell us that the man was responsible for
spreading the news. Mark and Luke recorded the result of the spread
differently. Luke recorded that on hearing the news of the healing, large
crowds gathered round Jesus to hear him and to be cured of their diseases, however
Jesus could not remain with \the crowds but went off to some desert place to
pray. Mark began from where Luke stopped. He noted that Jesus had to go to some
desert places, since he could no longer walk openly in town as a result o the healing.
It was in these desert places that the crowds came to meet him. Matthew is
completely silent on this series of events.[13]
Theological Implications
We can draw a lot of
theological implications from this healing episode. Firstly, just as biblical leprosy
made individuals ritually unclean and unfit to join in normal human society, so
too our fallen state and all our sins make us spiritually unclean and unworthy
to enter the presence of God. Leprosy, like sin, is regarded as detestable, deforming, and
unclean. Both leprosy and sin begin small then grow relentlessly until they
infect the whole person. They also both cause serious social problems. And so,
when we come to Jesus, he cleanses us from all our defilements and makes us
whole, free from all that make us estranged from his presence.[14]
Secondly, Jesus, by his action of healing, emphasized the law of love over and
above the love of law. The law was that no one should have anything to do with
a leper; Jesus however, out of love for the man, broke the law. However, he
would also immediately emphasized the keeping of the other aspects of the law,[15]
namely, asking the man to show himself to the priest.[16] It
is thus obvious that Jesus broke the law only when it stops him from carrying
out works of love. Thirdly, the story teaches us compassion, to have compassion
for others, knowing that we are all equally weak.[17]
Fourthly, the leper said, “If you are willing …” The story teaches us that we
need to recognize that God has the ability to heal (or do whatever), but we
also need to recognize that he has the right not to do anything. We need to
recognize that we don’t know what is best. He does. [18] Fifthly,
the story teaches that faith needs to be followed by obedience. It is not
enough to be just cured or cleansed; we need to be obedient as well.
Conclusion
We have, in this work, considered
one of the many healing works of Jesus, namely, the cleansing of the leper. We
analysed the three synoptic Gospels’ treatment of the pericope, their
similarities and differences. We also carried out an exegesis of the story, where
we considered both the various forms of grammar used in the story and their
possible meanings. Furthermore, we highlighted some theological implications
that may arise from the story. It is our position that the story of the
cleansing of the leper is but a worthwhile reflection material for both the
individual Christian who strives to live a good life, and the church, a cohabitation
of saints and sinners..
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Brendan Bryne, A costly freedom, A theological reading of Mark’s Gospel, Minnesota
Liturgical Press, 2008.
Eugene LaVediere,, Luke, The Dublin: Liturgical Press,
1990)\
Joseph Fitzinger, The Gospel According to Luke, New York: DoubleDay, 1979
Morna D. Hooker, Black’s New Testament Commentaries, The Gospel according to St Mark,
London: A & C Black Limited. 1991.
Robert Tonnehill, Mark, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996.
The Navare Bible, New Testament
Dublin: Four course press, 2008.
The
New Jerusalem Bible
The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1
(Malleswaram: Thological Publicauons in India, 2009) 342-344
William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1, Malleswaram: Theological Publications
in India, 2009.
______________The Gospel of Mark Malleswaram: Theological Publications in India,
2009.
Clarke Adam, “Commentary on Mark
1:40” http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/view.cgi?bk=mr&ch=11832.
Accessed on 12/12/2015.
“Literary Context”, https://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/literary-context/how-to-study-your-bible/george-guthrie.
Accessed on 8/11/2015.
Richard Niell, “Mark 1:40-45
commentary”:http://www.lectionary.org/EXEG_Engl_WEB/NT/02-Mark-WEB/Mark%2001.40-45.htm.
Accessed on 13/12/2015.
Schaff Philip, ”Schaff's Popular
Commentary on the New Testament” http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/view.cgi?bk=mr&ch=1
Accessed on 17/12/2015.
[1] Cf. “Literary Context”,
https://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/literary-context/how-to-study-your-bible/george-guthrie. Accesed on 8/11/2015
[2] Cf. William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1 (Malleswaram: Thological Publicauons
in India, 2009) 342-344
[3] Cf. Clarke, Adam, “Commentary on Mark 1:40” .http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/acc/view.cgi?bk=mr&ch=11832.
Accessed on 12/12/2015
[4] Cf. Brendan Bryne, A
costly freedom, A theological reading of Mark’s Gospel ( MinnesotaL Liturgical
Press, 2008) 49
[5] Cf. Morna D. Hooker. Blac’sk New Testament Commentaries, The
Gospel according to St Mark ( London: A & C Black Limited. 1991) 78
[6] Cf. William Barclay, The Gospel of Mark ( Malleswaram:
Theological Publications in India, 2009) 50-51
[7]Cf. Richard Niell, “Mark
1:40-45 commentary”:http://www.lectionary.org/EXEG_Engl_WEB/NT/02-Mark-WEB/Mark%2001.40-45.htm..
Accessed on 13/12/2015
[8] Cf. Robert Tonnehill, Mark (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996)
102-104
[9] Cf. The Navare Bible, New Testament ( Dublin: Four course
press, 2008) 167
[10] Cf. Robert Tonnehill, Mark ( Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996) 102-104
[11] Schaff,
Philip,”Schaff's Popular Commentary on the New Testament” http://www.studylight.org/commentaries/scn/view.cgi?bk=mr&ch=1. Accessed on 17/12/2015
[12] Cf. Morna D. Hooker. Black’s New Testament Commentaries, The Gospel according to St Mark, 78
[13]Cf. Joseph Fitzinger, The Gospel According to Luke (New York: DoubleDay,
1979) 571-573) 82
[14] Cf. The Navare Bible, New Testament (Dublin: Four course press, 2008)72
[15] Cf. William Barclay, The Gospel of Matthew, Volume 1
( Malleswaram: Thological Publicauons in India, 2009) 342-344
[16] Cf. Morna D. Hooker. Black’s New Testament
Commentaries, The Gospel according to St Mark, 79
[17] Cf. Eugene LaVediere,, Luke ( The Dublin: Liturgical Press, 1990) 80-81
[18] Cf. “Cleansing the
Leper” https://bible.org/seriespage/8-cleansing-leper. Accessed on 20/12/2015
Comments
Post a Comment