Gospel of Mark as a Theology of the Cross - Book Report/Review Example

Mark's Gospel is a Theology of the Cross First of all, let us gather all appearances of the word "cross" in the Mark's gospel. There are five such appearances which can be easy divided into two groups. First group is comprised by two sentences A: And when he had called the people unto him with his disciples also, he said unto them, Whosoever will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me (Mark 8:34) and B: Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me (Mark 10:21). Second group is comprised by following sentences C: And they compel one Simon a Cyrenian, who passed by, coming out of the country, the father of Alexander and Rufus, to bear his cross (Mark 15:21) and D: And they that passed by railed on him, wagging their heads, and saying, Ah, thou that destroyest the temple, and buildest it in three days, save thyself, and come down from the cross. Likewise also the chief priests mocking said among themselves with the scribes, He saved others; himself he cannot save. Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him (Mark 15:29-32). These verses are starting points for our study of Mark's gospel as a theology of the cross. Of course, there are some similarities for these verses in other gospels, namely Matthew 10:38 and Luke 14:27 for A-sentence; Matthew 27:32, Luke 23:26, and John 19:16-19 for C-sentence; Mark14:58 and John 2:19 for D-sentence. We can use these external similarities to clarify meanings of basic sentences, from A to D. Also, we can expand these sentences, i.e. analyse their context within Mark's gospel to explain conception of the cross. Here, verse A is taken from the teachings of Jesus to his disciples by the way into the towns of Caesarea Philippi (Mark 8:27f & 9:1). Verse B is related to indoctrination about inheritance of eternal life in the way to Jerusalem (Mark 10:17-31). Verses C & D are taken from descriptions of procession upon Golgotha and of Christ's crucifixion (Mark 15:15-39). In fact, gospel's context is essential for interpretation of the cross appearances, both verbal and factual. Why we categorize five basic sentences into two groups given above Such dividing reflects two levels of appearance of the cross in Mark's gospel, namely symbolical (sentences A & B) and historical (sentences C & D). We will show that these levels are strongly interconnected within Mark's gospel. Moreover, it seems that links between these levels of meaning can elucidate theological role of the cross, i.e. give answers to some of following questions. What is the cross What it means for Christ What it means for apostles, for first Christians Is here something hidden How to connect conception of the cross with other ideas of Christianity What about relations of the cross with Christian practice All these questions are intensively disputable in theological sense, e.g. see classical works of Clow (1911), Storr (1919), Dillistone (1953), and Knox (1958). Most of them are concentrated similarly upon interrelations of the historical cross and symbolical cross, with parallels to fate and sacrifice conceptions. So, what we know about symbolical cross This cross is mentioned twice in Mark's narration of Jesus' teachings; see verses A & B above. At first glance verse A is simply reduction of verse B which follows from contexts of these sentences. Undoubtedly, in both cases Jesus talks about the same cross, symbolic cross of Christian moral imperative and Christian self-sacrifice. Let us analyze verse A. At first, Jesus says 'Whosoever will come after me'. These words can mean that the cross is intended for every Christian, i.e. that the cross is universal attribute for believing Christian. Of course, this is not historical cross of crucifixion, but allegorical. This allegorical cross became real (but yet symbolic) in Christian art and tradition. However, for Jesus and his apostles this cross later became historical. This is the first link between two conceptions of the cross (symbolic and historical) in the gospel. It is interesting that universality of the cross in Christian tradition somewhat correlates with conception of personal fate. Indeed, every believing Christian must take his own cross as a matter of course. In other words the cross (in whatever sense) is inescapable and even necessary for every Christian. Words 'come after me' show both primary role of Christ upon the path to the Kingdom of God and also openness of his teachings for everyone. Also these words introduce certain (but entirely subjective) measure for Christian estimation of personal life which can be verbalized by question 'How I am bearing my own cross' However, this one and similar questions are meaningless without clear definition of the cross allegory. Then, Jesus says 'let him deny himself'. At first glance this moral imperative seems to be very similar to Buddhist doctrine of self-negation. But Jesus teaches to deny oneself for God and to achieve the Kingdom of God (Mark 1:15, 4:30, 10:14, etc.). This is rather imperative of self-sacrifice for eternal life in the Kingdom of God than self-negation for eternal peace. And this is the first clarification of the cross allegory, which was probably unclear (i.e. hidden) for followers of Christ before his crucifixion predicted in Mark 8:31. So, allegorical cross becomes synonymic to self-denial for God, and Jesus says 'and take up his cross'. The word 'his' means here that the cross of Christian doctrine has two seems to be contradictory qualities: universality (i.e. applicability for all Christians) and individuality (i.e. reflection of features of every person). Therefore, conception of the cross becomes polysemantic. It seems that such feature was also hidden for Disciples of Christ because own path of Jesus to self-sacrifice was yet incomplete. Also, here we find another link between allegoric and real cross. We can assume that phrase 'and take up his cross' reflects the extreme phase of the self-denial, i.e. self-denial even to death (Gould 1921, p. 156). The cross means here the instrument of death. The criminal carried his own cross to the place of execution, and so, to take up the cross means to go to the place of death. According to Gould, the idea is that a disciple is to follow the example of Jesus in giving up everything, even life itself, sooner than anything belonging to the eternal life. Indeed, Jesus finishes sentence A by words 'and follow me'. This is an ultimate point in definition of entire Christian doctrine. When Jesus declares self-sacrifice as the way to eternal life in the Kingdom of God (via allegory of the cross), he also proclaims that the way 'after him' is the most appropriate; see Matthew 11:30. Also he points out by example of own life that this way is efficient because even shameful crucifixion of the Son of man will lead to his resurrection in glory (Mark 8:31). Here, Jesus unites own fate, own way, and own cross-bearing. Another evidence of interrelations between allegorical cross and historical cross follows from elucidative words of Jesus just after verse A: 'For whosoever will save his life shall lose it; but whosoever shall lose his life for my sake and the gospel's, the same shall save it' (Mark 8:35). It is clear that by this explication the cross becomes not allegorical, but real and it must be considered as part of following crucifixion of Jesus. So, we can conclude that entire verse A is threefold repetition of the same thing: self-denial, cross-bearing, and following after Jesus. And this threefold thing was shared by Christ with all his disciples in A. There are many similar conclusions about meaning of the cross of A in classical theological studies. For instance, Knox notes that 'the connection between Christ's death and the Christian's call to self-abnegating service is made quite explicit in such teachings of the Gospels as Mark 8:34 and Luke 14:27' (Knox 1958, p. 162). Here Christ anticipated death for himself, so his words 'take up his cross' are demands for self-sacrifice to death for any who attached themselves to him. Similarly, Allen states about cross-bearing that 'not only is violent death the destined fate of the Messiah, but it must be readily submitted to by all his disciples. They must live as men on their way to crucifixion.' (Allen 1915, p. 120). Moreover, Thompson (1962) notes that here there are three obligations or conditions of discipleship: self-denial, the bearing of the cross, and 'to follow Christ'. It is interesting that Jesus' requirement is not to deny things to himself (as the indirect object) but to deny himself (as direct object) for Jesus; cf. Mark 3:35. According to Thompson, the bearing of the cross in A is rather the extent to which Jesus' disciples are to carry their devotion to him. We know that a criminal carried his own cross to the place of execution, so to take up the cross meant to be willing to go to one's death. 'To take up the cross is to be ready as Jesus was to lay down life itself in obedience to the will of God and for the good of men' (Thompson 1962, p. 144). Therefore, allegorical cross is directly interrelated with the cross in its literal interpretation in the Mark's gospel. Verse B is the more comprehensive reappearance of A. Why this reappearance of A was told by Jesus First of all, statement A was told for all progeny of Christ, but statement B is more individual; cf. contexts of Mark 8:27-38 and Mark 10:17-31. Another feature is much more important in theological sense. Verse B follows by the well-known commandments of the Old Testament; see Mark 10:18-19. Here, Jesus uses strategy of succession, not total negation of the old tradition; cf. with later declaration of the New Testament in Mark 14:24-25. Moreover, Jesus shows very positive attitude to those who truly executed the Ten Commandments: 'Then Jesus beholding him loved him' (Mark 10:21). Execution of the commandments was not enough to achieve the Kingdom of the God, therefore Jesus gives additional injunction: 'One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me' (Mark 10:21). What it means Firstly, Christ says 'go thy way', i.e. declares self-determination of individual actions for those who execute basic commandments. Then, Jesus says 'and come, take up the cross, and follow me' which is simply reappearance of verse A discussed above. Here both phrases are in contrast, i.e. there is contradiction between self-determination and self-denial. However, self-denial is nevertheless predominant. Indeed, one has freedom of actions before following after Jesus, before cross-bearing, before self-denial for Jesus. One may choose own way before choosing the way of Christ, not after. There is freedom of choice in life before Christ, not after. Of course, such freedom is limited by the Ten Commandments. However, Jesus significantly extenuates this imperative by following words: 'Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.' (Matthew 11:28-30). Therefore, combination of these commandments by Jesus allows us to somewhat extend meaning of cross-bearing in Mark 10:21. Then, the commandments of the Old Testament were interdictory imperatives, i.e. mostly negative; see Mark 10:19. Jesus introduces new challenging imperative which is highly positive. The thing which was lacking for new disciples was the positive side of doctrine. This was not enjoined by Christ as an extraordinary goodness, supererogation, perfection, or pure righteousness. On the way to the Kingdom of God, Jesus commands to free slave of wealth from it; see Mark 10:23-25. This is a part of cross-bearing. Here Jesus requires denying things to himself before to deny himself; cf. Mark 8:34. So, the counsel of Christ was adapted to an individual case. There are obviously two grounds for it: one the need of the man himself, and the other the desire of Jesus to attach new spirit to himself, i.e. to have him among his disciples. New Christian needed to cut away all his attachments to this world, all his temptations to luxurious, self-indulgent living, for his own good, in order to follow the self-denying life of Christ. Again, this is a part of cross-bearing, required by Jesus to inherit eternal life, i.e. one must throw away earthly possessions in order to obtain treasure in heaven. The cross-bearing becomes more actual and clear after such elucidation of Jesus. Now, what we know about historical cross Following the old tradition of the Church, the cross has commonly been taken to be the crux immissa, or four-armed cross (Cross 1899, p.958). Crucifixion was introduced into Palestine by the Romans. Among the Romans crucifixion was originally reserved for slaves and criminals of the worst kind. Also, Mark writes: 'And the superscription of his accusation was written over, the King of the Jews' (; Mark 15:26). In fact, historical cross reflects strongest aversion of old world of Pharisees to newborn doctrine. Also, this is the end of cross-bearing, both allegorical and historical. Dillistone describes psychological essence of Mark's scene of crucifixion by following words: 'This is the final shame, the final indignity, the final self-emptying: on the cross, between two others who had been condemned to death as unworthy of continuing any longer in the life of the community, Jesus was regarded as a common felon, a menace to society, a man worthy only of a place among criminals... He could step no lower: he was making his grave with the wicked and suffering the shame of the death of a transgressor' (Dillistone 1953, p. 108). It seems that the title 'the King of the Jews' was intended to bring out the contrast between Jesus' claims and his situation, and the certainty that if his claims were real, he would be saved from the incongruity and absurdity of that situation. Anyone could see the apparent absurdity of Jesus position. However, idea that an act of power is going to change a Pharisee, formal and hypocritical legalist, into a spiritual man, is erroneous. Even on the real cross Jesus acts not by power, but by mystery of self-sacrifice; see parallels in the gospels of Matthew and Luke. Here we find the irreconcilable opposition: on the one hand, power can create the Kingdom of God; and on the other hand, power is absolutely defenceless to do anything. However, this historical cross was simultaneously the throne of the King. Indeed, a sacrificial death is the true work of the Messiah of law, prophecy, and psalm; and because he did not come down from the cross, therefore is he crowned with glory in heaven; see Maclaren (1894) and Storr (1919). So, what this historical cross means for Mark The cross gave for Mark the opportunity to make bright disclosures of outstanding character of Christ. Then, the passion on the cross gave the proofs of pre-established harmony between prophecy and the life of Jesus. In fact, this was a culmination of the cross-bearing when allegorical cross became real. We can find many parallels of this cross-bearing and its culmination in other gospels; see e.g. Matthew 10:38-40, 16:24, and Luke 9:23, 14:27. And again we find two meanings of the cross: symbolical and real. To take, or take up, or bear a cross was a phrase for undergoing a great disgrace, suggested by the sight of the punishment of crucifixion. Another meaning of the cross was allegory of self-sacrifice to God and self-denial for Christ. Bibliography: Allen, WC 1915, The gospel according to Saint Mark, Rivingtons, London. Buttrick, GA 1932, Jesus came preaching, Charles Scribner's Sons, New York [See chapter VIII 'The preaching of the cross', pp. 193-218]. Campbell, JM 1907, The heart of the gospel: a popular exposition of the doctrine of the atonement, Fleming H. Revell Company, London [See chapter XVI 'The rationale of the cross', pp. 119-126]. Canney, MA & Cheyne, TK 1899, 'Cross', in TK Cheyne & JS Black (eds) Encyclopaedia Biblica, vol. I, The Macmillan Company, New York, pp. 957-961. Chadwick, GA 1900, The gospel according to St. Mark, Hodder & Stoughton, London. Clark, HW 1944, The cross and the eternal order, The Macmillan Company, Binghamton [See chapter V 'Cross and resurrection', pp. 78-135]. Clow, WM 1911, The Cross in Christian experience, Hodder & Stoughton, London. Dermott, GM 1907, The gospel according to St. Mark, Wells Gardner, London. Dillistone, FW 1953, Jesus Christ and His cross: studies on the saving work of Christ, The Westminster Press, Philadelphia. Gould, EP 1921, A critical and exegetical commentary on the gospel according to St. Mark, T. & T. Clark, Edinburgh. Knox, J 1958, The death of Christ: the cross in New Testament history and faith, Abingdon Press, New York. Maclaren, A 1894, The gospel of St. Mark, A.C. Armstrong & Son, New York [See chapter IX 'Christ's cross, and ours', pp. 121-136]. Robinson, TH 1923, St. Mark's life of Jesus, Student Christian Movement, London. Storr, VF 1919, The problem of the cross, John Murray, London. Swete, HB 1913, The gospel according to St. Mark: the Greek text with introduction notes and indices, Macmillan & Co, London. Thompson, ET 1962, The gospel according to Mark and its meaning for today, 2nd edn, John Knox Press, Richmond. Read More