The third Sunday of Ordinary Time is celebrated as the Sunday of the Word of God - a day devoted to the celebration, study and dissemination of the Word in Scripture. This year (year B) the Sunday Gospels are taken from Mark's Gospel. On this occasion, we therefore share reflection on the role of the disciples in the first half of this Gospel, the texts also read on weekdays in the first part of Ordinary Time, through the lense of narrative analysis - a key to reading the whole Gospel and allow it to bear fruit in our lives.
1. Introduction
Of the four canonical gospels, Mark’s
Gospel is both the shortest and the earliest.[1]
The date and place of its final composition have been debated. Most scholars
agree that it was written around 70 C.E.[2]
Among the most widely accepted hypotheses about location, we find Rome or a
community closer to Palestine, either in Palestine itself, in Galilee or in
Syria.[3] As this matter is not of
critical importance for my subject, I will not pursue it further here, given
the limitations of time and space.
Two
of the central themes in Mark are christology and discipleship. Who is Jesus,
what does it mean to say that he is the Christ, the Messiah, and what does it
mean to be his follower, his disciple?[4]
These two themes are intimately connected. Narrative analysis shows that one of
the ways Mark[5] communicates his christology
and his subsequent teaching on discipleship, is through presenting the audience[6] with the response of
different groups to Jesus.[7] Three such groups can be
clearly distinguished: the Jewish authorities, the disciples, and "the
crowd", in which we also find several minor characters standing out.[8] It is with the second of these
groups this essay will be concerned.
Two
main divisions of Mark’s Gospel can be distinguished. The first, 1:1 – 8:30
recounts the beginnings of Jesus’ ministry in Galilee and the gradual
revelation of his identity, leading up to Peter’s confession in 8:29: "You
are the Christ."[9] The second, 8:31 - 16:8,
turns the attention towards the fate of Jesus in Jerusalem, his suffering and
death, and the revelation of the nature of his Messiahship.[10]
There is a significant change of pace and a development of both the major
conflicts in the plot and the main characters as we go from the first to the
second part.[11] This essay will therefore
confine itself to studying the portrayal of the disciples in the first half of
the Gospel. I will pursue the task mainly with the aid of narrative analysis
and studies done in this field.
2. Study of the portrayal of the disciples
in the first half of Mark’s Gospel
2.1 Characters and characterisation:
preliminary remarks
This essay will essentially be a study of
characters in a narrative. There are several techniques a narrator can use to
evaluate characters and present them to the audience in a positive or negative
light. A very common way to do this is by establishing connections between
characters, comparing and contrasting them with each other.[12]
Through the opening statement: “Beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the
Son of God” (1:1), Jesus is presented as the main character of the narrative.[13] This is his story. The
scenes immediately following: the preaching of John the Baptist who prepares
the way for the “stronger one”, the baptism of Jesus where the heavenly voice,
presumably God’s voice, proclaims him God’s beloved son, and his initial
victory over Satan in the desert (1:2 – 13), establish Jesus for the audience
as the main protagonist and the most reliable point of reference.[14] As Robert C. Tannehill
writes: “We are expected to judge the words and actions of others in light of
the words and actions of Jesus” [15]
There
has been some debate among scholars about whom Mark refers to when using the
word “disciples” (mathetes). Is it simply a synonym for the Twelve, or
does it designate a larger group of which they are representatives or an inner
nucleus, much like Peter, James and John stand in relation to the rest of the
Twelve? With Tannehill[16] and Donahue/Harrington[17], I believe that a simple
equation of the disciples with the Twelve is too limited, and consider
plausible the thesis that we are dealing with a somewhat larger group of which
the Twelve are a central part and of which they serve as a sort of
representative. I also find convincing Elizabeth S. Malbon’s description of an
expansive movement towards the inclusion of persons other than the Twelve, even
as far as to the implied reader of the Gospel, at the level of the relationship
between story and narration/narrating.[18]
The
answer to the question of exactly whom the word “disciples” designates has,
however, little bearing on the following discussion. What at any rate seems to
be clear is that there is a group of people, often represented by the Twelve if
not exclusively composed of them, who distinguish themselves from the crowd and
the Jewish authorities by their particular relationship with Jesus. It is the portrayal
of this group in the first half of the Gospel that is now in question.
2.2 Called to follow, be with and be sent
out: positive aspects
The disciples first enter the scene in
1:16 - 20, with the story of the call of Simon and Andrew, James and John. A
distinctive trait of this story is that the initiative is on Jesus’ side. He
walks by, he sees them and he calls them (1:16 - 20). The same pattern is
present in the call of Levi a little later (2:13 - 14). The disciples have not
sought Jesus out and asked to become his followers, as the disciples of a
Jewish Rabbi would do. They did not choose, they are chosen.[19] This aspect is emphasised
by the later story of Jesus’ appointment of the Twelve: "He now went up
onto the mountain and summoned those he wanted" (3:13). The privileged
character of the disciples also comes through in chapter 4, when Jesus explains
why he speaks on parables: "To you is granted the secret of the kingdom of
God, but to those who are outside everything comes in parables" (Mk.
4:11). Throughout his Gospel, Mark frequently makes a distinction between those
who “are with” Jesus and “those who are outside”, often marked by the
characteristic Greek phrase kat’idian, which means “by themselves”,
“privately”.[20] This emphasis on the
difference between insiders and outsiders contributes, in my opinion, to
reinforce the attractive value of those who are on the inside.
The
disciples are to "come after" Jesus (1:17), to "follow him"
(2:14), which means not just walking where he walks, but imitating his being
and acting, his way of life.[21] They are to "be
with" (3:14) Jesus and to "be sent out to proclaim the message, with
power to cast out demons" (3:14 - 15), that is doing the work Jesus
himself does. The close personal relationship between Jesus and the disciples
is further emphasised in 3:31 - 35, where Jesus calls those who are with him,
indeed, anyone who does the will of God, his brother, sister and mother. They,
in contrast to his family who a few paragraphs before were presented as
tracking him down because they think him mad (3:21), have received Jesus as he
should be received.[22]
Thus,
the disciples emerge as a privileged group, one with whom the audience would
want to identify.[23] They are chosen by Jesus
himself and they respond positively to his call, at least in the beginning.
When he sends them out to preach, heal and cast out demons (6:8, cf. 3:13 –
15), they are successful in their mission (6:12 – 13.30).[24]
Jesus is even portrayed as caring and considerate towards them and thus as
valuing them positively (e.g. 6:31).
A
second way of evaluating characters in a story is to contrast them with the
antagonists.[25] The chief antagonists in
the Gospel of Mark are the Jewish authorities (Pharisees, Herodians, Sadducees,
the Sanhedrin) who stand in declared opposition to Jesus.[26]
In the first chapters of the Gospel, several contrasts between the disciples
and the authorities can be noted. The disciples heed Jesus’ call and follow him
unquestioningly, thus showing acceptance of his authority. The authorities on
the other hand continuously question, criticise or try to trap Jesus, and
already at the beginning of chapter 3, they are “discussing how to destroy him”
(3:6). Like Jesus, the disciples are questioned and criticised by the Pharisees
(2:18 – 28; 7:1 - 8), a fact which serves both to emphasise the positive link
between them and Jesus and to distance them from the antagonists.[27] As already mentioned, the
disciples also stand in contrast to Jesus’ relatives and townspeople. Where the
latter think him out of his mind and track him down (3:20 – 21.31), or reject
him (6:4), the former are counted as his true family (3:33 – 35), those who
accept him and his message.
What
on the surface seems to be the high point of the positive portrayal of the
disciples, Peter’s confession of Jesus as the Messiah in 8:30, also marks the
point of transition from the first to the second part of the Gospel, and the
turning point in the narrative from the successful mission of Jesus in Galilee
towards his dire fate in Jerusalem.[28]
With typical Markan skill, this confession is placed immediately after a scene
displaying lack of understanding on the part of the disciples (8:14 – 21), to
which I will come back in 2.3. In my opinion, this communicates both ironical
chiding of, and hope for the disciples given that Peter’s confession is
truthful – the audience already knows this from chapter 1 – in spite of his
incomprehension and, as the following chapters will show, faulty assumptions of
its meaning. However, as the second half of the Gospel falls outside the scope
of this essay, I will not develop this further, but rather let it mark a
turning point also here towards the more negative aspects of the image of the
disciples in Mark.
2.3 Having eyes, but not seeing and ears,
but not hearing: negative aspects
While the portrayal of the disciples in
the first half of Mark’s Gospel presents them positively as a chosen group with
a particular and close relationship to Jesus, contrasting their positive
response and solidarity with him with the opposition and hostility of the
authorities and Jesus’ kin and townspeople, a conflict is also building up
between the disciples and Jesus.[29] Little signs of
incomprehension and struggle to grasp the essence of Jesus’ identity and
message are scattered throughout the story, and understanding and faith fail to
increase as expected (cf. the parable of the sower, 4:1 - 20)[30]. As the disciples have been
presented as receiving private instruction and living in a close relationship
with Jesus, even to the point of sharing in his mission – and successfully so –
their failure to understand and grow in faith is both surprising and comes
across as all the more grave. Elizabeth S. Malbon states poignantly: “One
expects disciples to be exemplary, their fallibility is surprising.”[31] I will now proceed to
examine the negative aspects of the portrayal of the disciples, considering
again how they are presented in relation to Jesus and to other characters.
The
first subtle hint at the growing breach between Jesus and the disciples can be
found already in the first chapter of the Gospel, where Jesus has withdrawn to
pray early the morning after the paradigmatic day of his ministry in Capernaum.
“Simon and his companions,” it is said, “set out in search for him, and when
they found him they said: ‘Everybody is looking for you.’” (1:36). The Greek
verb katedioxen, here translated “set out in search of him”, has hostile
overtones, and could also be translated “pursue” in a negative sense. Similarly
the verb zetein, “looking for” is later used about how Jesus’ enemies
look for ways to destroy him and acquires increasingly negative connotations.[32] Thus a link is created
between the disciples and those who do not accept Jesus. This link is further
reinforced by the use of the expression “hardness of heart”. We find it
characterising the opponents of Jesus in 3:5, calling forth anger and grief on
the part of latter, and of the disciples in 6:52 and 8:17, with a similar frustrated
reaction in Jesus (8:17 – 21).[33] The incident of 8:17 is
particularly striking, placed as it is immediately after a confrontation
between Jesus and the Pharisees and a subsequent warning from Jesus to the
disciples that they must “look out for the leaven of the Pharisees and
Herodians” (8:11 – 15).
This
scene in chapter 8 is the third in a series of scenes set in a boat on the lake
(4:35 – 41; 6:45 – 52 and 8:14 – 21). Repetition, especially in a threefold
pattern with the third incident as the climax of the series, is one of the
devices the narrator of the Gospel uses to emphasise important points.[34] We see it employed also in
the call and mission of the Twelve, going from the call of Peter, Andrew, James
and John 1:16 - 20, to the establishment of the group in 3:13 – 19 and finally
the mission of the Twelve in 6:8.[35] However, while the
call/mission scenes contribute to a positive evaluation of the disciples, the
opposite is the case with the boat scenes.
In
the first scene, which follows immediately after the statement that the
disciples were gifted with private instruction, the disciples demonstrate their
lack of faith faced with the threat of the storm. Their fearfulness is
contrasted with the confidence of the peacefully sleeping Jesus, and
reprimanded by his questioning: “Why are you so frightened? Have you still no
faith?” (4:40). The second and the third scene both follow a feeding miracle,
and it is stated explicitly that the disciples have not understood the meaning
of the miracles (6:52 and 8:17 – 21). On both occasions the expression
“hardness of heart” appears, and in chapter 8, Jesus reprimands the disciples
with a series of questions, even taking up the quotation from the Old Testament
used in 4:12 about having eyes but not seeing and ears but not hearing, thus
linking the disciples to “those outside” who did not understand Jesus’
teaching. The point is further emphasised by two healings, one of a deaf man
and one of a blind, framing the episode.[36]
Thus the disciples, who initially received
the word with enthusiasm, quickly show that its roots are not yet very deep.
Faith, the expected response of those to whom it is given to know Jesus - to
whom is given the secret of the Kingdom of God, so to speak - does not seem to
develop and bear fruit. This failure comes through even stronger when
characters emerging from the crowd, not among those who follow Jesus, are
portrayed as exemplars of faith.[37] The prime examples are the
woman suffering from a haemorrhage (5:5 – 34), the president of the synagogue,
named Jairus (5:21 – 24.35 – 43) and the Syro-Phoenician woman (7:24 – 30).
3. Conclusion
While the above study is non-exhaustive,
it still permits us to conclude that the first half of Mark’s Gospel portrays
the disciples as complex characters, conveying both positive and negative
traits. In the first chapters the image given is highly positive. The
privileged status of the disciples and their favourable response to Jesus, as
well as their close association with him are emphasised. As the narrative
proceeds, signs of a growing conflict can be detected. Through linking the
disciples with the groups opposing Jesus and contrasting them with minor
characters who stand out as exemplars of faith, the narrator devaluates the
disciples and undermines their attractiveness as role models for the audience.
As
already suggested, I personally find in the parable of the sower and its
explanation the best image of the portrayal of the disciples in the first half
of Mark. The Word is received with enthusiasm and immediately sprouts, in a way
similar to the immediate response of the first disciples and their initial
success. However, the ground is rocky – a word evoking the name Peter, the Rock
– and the roots do not go very deep, hence the failure to grow in understanding
and faith.[38] I also consider, along with
Tannehill, Bourquin and Malbon,[39] that both the positive and
the negative traits in the portrayal of the disciples open for identification
with them by the audience, both ancient and modern.
[1]
John R. Donahue S.J. and Daniel J.
Harrington S.J., The Gospel of Mark, ed. by Daniel J. Harrington S.J.,
Sacra Pagina Series vol. 2 (Collegeville, Minnesota: The Liturgical Press, 2002),
pp. 3 - 5.
[2]
Donahue/Harrington, pp. 44 - 46; Wilfrid
J. Harrington, Reading Mark for the first time (Mahwah, New Jersey:
Paulist Press, 2013), p. 10.
[3]
David Rhoads, Joanna Dewey and Donald
Michie, Mark as Story, 3rd edn. (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2012), p.
2; For a broader discussion, see Donahue/Harrington, pp.44 - 46.
[4]
Donahue/Harrington, p. 29.
[5]
Throughout the essay, I will use the name
Mark to refer both to the implied author, and the narrator of the Gospel,
leaving the question of the historical author aside. With “implied author”, I
understand the author as he/she can be reconstructed through analysis of the
text, and with “the narrator”, the narrating voice within the story.
[6]
Following Rhoads/Michie/Dewey, I will use
the word "audience" to refer to those to whom the Gospel is addressed,
covering both readers and hearers, receiving the text either by reading it
themselves or having it read to them.
[7]
Yvan Bourqin, Marc, une théologie de la
fragilité, Le monde de la Bible, No 55 (Genève: Labor et Fides, 2005), p.
30.
[8]
Rhoads/Dewey/Michie, p. 99.
[9] All
biblical quotations are from the New Jerusalem Bible. Unless otherwise stated,
they refer to chapters and verses in Mark’s Gospel.
[10] Harrington,
pp. 23 – 30.
[11] Rhoads/Dewey/Michie,
p. 47; Bourqin, p. 34.
[12] Rhoads/Dewey/Michie,
p. 100.
[13] ibid.
104.
[14] Donahue/Harrington,
p. 23.
[15] Robert
C. Tannehill, "The Disciples in Mark: The Function of a Narrative
Role", The Journal of Religion No. 4, Vol. 57 (Oct., 1977), 386 -
405 (p. 391).
[16] Tannehill,
p. 388, note 8.
[17] Donahue/Harrington,
p. 30.
[18] Elizabeth
Struthers Malbon, "Disciples/Crowds/Whoever: Markan Characters and
Readers", Novum Testamentum, Fasc. 2, Vol. 28 (Apr. 1986), 104 -
130 (p. 107, note 9).
[19] Donahue/Harrington,
p. 30.
[20] Harrington,
p. 41.
[21] William
Barclay, New Testament Words (London: SCM Press Ltd, 1964), p. 42.
[22] Tannehill,
p. 397.
[23] Tannehill,
p. 392 – 393; Bourquin, p. 37; Malbon, p. 104.
[24] Bourquin,
p. 33.
[25] Tannehill
p. 192.
[26] Rhoads/Dewey/Michie,
p. 117.
[27] Malbon,
p. 122.
[28] Rhoads/Dewey/Michie,
p. 75.
[29] Tannehill,
p. 398.
[30] ibid.
[31] Malbon,
p. 124.
[32] Donahue/Harrington,
p. 87.
[33] ibid.,
p. 116.
[34] Tannehill,
p. 390.
[35] ibid.,
pp. 396 – 397.
[36] For
the whole of this paragraph, see Tannehill, pp. 398 - 400.
[37] Rhoads/Dewey/Michie,
p. 125.
[38] Cf.
commentary of the passage in Donahue/Harrington, pp. 136 – 148.