Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Perspective
He opens his section on The Beatitudes (5:3-10)with this statement: "Jesus begins the Sermon on the Mount with messages of comfort, what was called in antiquity a consolatio, an address to those afflicted, neglected, or persecuted."(p. 77) I have been turning this over in my mind since I read it. I can't even begin to count how many times I have read, or listened to someone read The Beatitudes. I don't think I have ever experienced them as being comforting. Early on I grasp that Jesus was talking about people who were "afflicted, neglected, or persecuted" , somehow I missed that he was talking TO people who were "afflicted, neglected, or persecuted". I do believe this explains my reaction.
While I grew up in significantly less afluence than we now have I never knew serious want as a child. Our days of student poverty were definately days of poverty, but we expected them to be short lived and they were. When I started becoming a more outspoken advocate for the full aceptance of lgbt persons in the church and in our society I wondered what I was going to be in for. The truth is I have been glared at a couple of times and once had 2 truly awful hours during a vigil with Soulforce. Even if these had not come with the many good friends I have made and countless positive experiences it would not qualify as persecuted. In short I have not resonated with words of comfort for the "afflicted, neglected, or persecuted" because I have been none of those things.
Once I would have only thought in terms of what the passage meant for me. That is an important perspective -- deciding what a passage means for someone else is of very limited value. But that is not what I have been pondering recently. No I have been wondering just what to do with this insight. What difference does this make as I look at deepening how I live out my faith?
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Musings on Translations
from the NRSV:
14 When they came to the crowd, a man came to him, knelt before him, 15and said, ‘Lord, have mercy on my son, for he is an epileptic and he suffers terribly; he often falls into the fire and often into the water. 16And I brought him to your disciples, but they could not cure him.’ 17Jesus answered, ‘You faithless and perverse generation, how much longer must I be with you? How much longer must I put up with you? Bring him here to me.’ 18And Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of him, and the boy was cured instantly. 19Then the disciples came to Jesus privately and said, ‘Why could we not cast it out?’ 20He said to them, ‘Because of your little faith. For truly I tell you, if you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, “Move from here to there”, and it will move; and nothing will be impossible for you.’
Looking at other translations here some call the boy an epileptic, some a lunatic, one says he is "moonstruck", one says he suffers greatly with seizures, one says he "shakes wildly and suffers a great deal" , and one says "a bad spirit is in him and he suffers a great deal".
What should we expect of a translation? What is the important part of the story to capture? It is from a different time, a different culture, a different place. With the few details about the boy's condition we are given it seems likely that today he would be diagnosed with epilepsy. Is it important that we have pointed out to us that at that time epilepsy was thought to be a mental illness caused by evil spirits? That is an association that still has the power to make life more difficult for persons with epilepsy. A story of healing that is used to hurt. That may be faithful to the words that were used, but not to the truth that was taught.
Since starting this study I have read Matthew in full in 2 different translations, and select passages in several more. It really does make a difference. I have no answers. I have pondered this issue many times over the years and hearing that passage read aloud last week brought this back into my thoughts.