I think all of Scripture, in the end, is about God's love for His Creation. But these two passages are great illustrations of the myriad ways that love is revealed. God's love is haphazard in some ways...simply touch the hem of a garment? Well, that is a bit mechanistic, of course, and what heals the woman is the faith she proclaims through her action and proclamation. The haphazard nature is ours and not Christ's. But it illustrates the haphazard nature of relationship...and how we live with Christ.
Christ also gives a great example of how God's love operates. It is generous. He stops what he is doing, undermining the authority of the apostles in the process, to do what many think of as absurd. It is a lovely story. In the face of laughter, God heals. In the face of laughter, God stops everything to save a child.
The 2 Corinthians passage is by some interpretations and example of how God's love flows through how we share our wealth, financial and other. It is a foregone conclusion that there is enough to go around. The model is one of abundance and not scarcity. It is a model that regards assets and not needs foremost. Certainly, there are needs. But a needs-based theology denies the outpouring of the Spirit. Scarcity, according to this passage, may well be an illusion.
What do you think of that. Am I making this up? Is it actually not in the passages at all? I have been staring at them for a while now and think that I may be bringing too much to the table. What thinkest thou? The scripture is in the extended link.
2 Corinthians 8:7-15
8:7 Now as you excel in everything--in faith, in speech, in knowledge, in utmost eagerness, and in our love for you--so we want you to excel also in this generous undertaking.
8:8 I do not say this as a command, but I am testing the genuineness of your love against the earnestness of others.
8:9 For you know the generous act of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, so that by his poverty you might become rich.
8:10 And in this matter I am giving my advice: it is appropriate for you who began last year not only to do something but even to desire to do something--
8:11 now finish doing it, so that your eagerness may be matched by completing it according to your means.
8:12 For if the eagerness is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has--not according to what one does not have.
8:13 I do not mean that there should be relief for others and pressure on you, but it is a question of a fair balance between
8:14 your present abundance and their need, so that their abundance may be for your need, in order that there may be a fair balance.
8:15 As it is written, "The one who had much did not have too much, and the one who had little did not have too little."
Mark 5:21-43
5:21 When Jesus had crossed again in the boat to the other side, a great crowd gathered around him; and he was by the sea.
5:22 Then one of the leaders of the synagogue named Jairus came and, when he saw him, fell at his feet
5:23 and begged him repeatedly, "My little daughter is at the point of death. Come and lay your hands on her, so that she may be made well, and live."
5:24 So he went with him. And a large crowd followed him and pressed in on him.
5:25 Now there was a woman who had been suffering from hemorrhages for twelve years.
5:26 She had endured much under many physicians, and had spent all that she had; and she was no better, but rather grew worse.
5:27 She had heard about Jesus, and came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak,
5:28 for she said, "If I but touch his clothes, I will be made well."
5:29 Immediately her hemorrhage stopped; and she felt in her body that she was healed of her disease.
5:30 Immediately aware that power had gone forth from him, Jesus turned about in the crowd and said, "Who touched my clothes?"
5:31 And his disciples said to him, "You see the crowd pressing in on you; how can you say, 'Who touched me?'"
5:32 He looked all around to see who had done it.
5:33 But the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came in fear and trembling, fell down before him, and told him the whole truth.
5:34 He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has made you well; go in peace, and be healed of your disease."
5:35 While he was still speaking, some people came from the leader's house to say, "Your daughter is dead. Why trouble the teacher any further?"
5:36 But overhearing what they said, Jesus said to the leader of the synagogue, "Do not fear, only believe."
5:37 He allowed no one to follow him except Peter, James, and John, the brother of James.
5:38 When they came to the house of the leader of the synagogue, he saw a commotion, people weeping and wailing loudly.
5:39 When he had entered, he said to them, "Why do you make a commotion and weep? The child is not dead but sleeping."
5:40 And they laughed at him. Then he put them all outside, and took the child's father and mother and those who were with him, and went in where the child was.
5:41 He took her by the hand and said to her, "Talitha cum," which means, "Little girl, get up!"
5:42 And immediately the girl got up and began to walk about (she was twelve years of age). At this they were overcome with amazement.
5:43 He strictly ordered them that no one should know this, and told them to give her something to eat.
I'm not going to address the Corinthians question, but your notes about the section from Mark suggest to me that it may be useful or important to look at what "healing" means or could mean in that passage.
If the healing is taken literally, it would be pretty natural for someone in your congregation who's suffering a physical ailment to feel like they're getting the losing end of the "haphazard" deal. God healed the woman in the story who had faith, but won't heal the person in the present who also has faith.
If the "healing" meant feeling better spiritually and emotionally, feeling closer to God and therefore more able to bear the physical pain or disability, then one escapes that trap of "Why her and not me?" or "Why her and not this person I love who is suffering?"
What do you think?
Posted by: Megan at June 30, 2006 06:33 PMYeah, that is always the catch. It is useful in the long run to remember that healing is more complicated than one story from the Bible. But then if one is preaching with one such story in mind...
This is why I am thinking of the various ways that God heals...as you suggest, there is more than one.
Posted by: Tripp at June 30, 2006 06:52 PMTripp, I think you're pretty much right on. Megan said, If the healing is taken literally, it would be pretty natural for someone in your congregation who's suffering a physical ailment to feel like they're getting the losing end of the "haphazard" deal. God healed the woman in the story who had faith, but won't heal the person in the present who also has faith.
I think this healing could very well be taken literally, but it's not a fair comparison to say, "Why her and not me?" There are all sorts of other issues going on than simply the healing.
She was a woman. She was bleeding. She was removed from the community. She was an outcast.
She went to Jesus. She risked reaching out. She basically confessed. And she was allowed back into the community.
So, again, you are right in the whole theology-of-abundance thing. But there's also the aspect that we must be willing to reach out in our need.
And I know that was a really rambling answer, but it's Saturday morning.
Posted by: Reverend Ref at July 1, 2006 09:17 AMI doubt any other issues are that compelling to a person who is suffering a physical ailment, or who is watching someone they love suffer a physical ailment.
Presumably, anybody who's hearing Tripp's sermon is already "in the community."
Posted by: Megan at July 3, 2006 10:11 PMActually, to pick nits, Megan, usually physical suffering brings with it myriad issues...it dredges up everything else. Anything else a person experiences as suffering comes to the fore as part of the physical suffering...a widened context.
Thus endeth the picking of nits.
Posted by: Tripp at July 4, 2006 06:44 AMI completely disagree. When physical suffering occurs, I think (based on experience, my own and others') that everything else falls into the background.
Posted by: Megan at July 4, 2006 11:02 AMWell, imagine us disagreeing. Impossible! What I know is from the hospital and the research I did and read through. Is suffering on the minds of those who suffer and those who care for them? You bet. But to the exception of all else. You would be surprised how many people conflate things with their suffering. Back pain conflates with a siblinf rivalry...exascerbates (sp) a strained relationship with a parent...brings to the fore spiritual difficulties and questions...unfinished business etc. This is often enough the case that doctors and nurses are being trained to recognise the emotional fallout connected to acute and long term physical suffering.
Posted by: Tripp at July 4, 2006 06:59 PMIt's unlikely that I'd be surprised.
(Sorry to disappear like that -- I was back on the East Coast for my grandfather's 90th birthday party!)
Posted by: Megan at July 9, 2006 09:58 PM