Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 10:1-18

10:1 A wise magistrate educates his people,

and the rule of an intelligent person is well ordered.

2 As the people’s judge is, so are his officials;

as the ruler of the city is, so are all its inhabitants.

3 An undisciplined king ruins his people,

but a city becomes fit to live in through the understanding of its rulers.

4 The government of the earth is in the hand of the Lord,

and over it he will raise up the right leader for the time.

5 Human success is in the hand of the Lord,

and it is he who confers honor upon the lawgiver.

The Sin of Pride

6 Do not get angry with your neighbor for every injury,

and do not resort to acts of insolence.

7 Arrogance is hateful to the Lord and to mortals,

and injustice is outrageous to both.

8 Sovereignty passes from nation to nation

on account of injustice and insolence and wealth.

9 How can dust and ashes be proud?

Even in life the human body decays.

10 A long illness baffles the physician;

the king of today will die tomorrow.

11 For when one is dead

he inherits maggots and vermin and worms.

12 The beginning of human pride is to forsake the Lord;

the heart has withdrawn from its Maker.

13 For the beginning of pride is sin,

and the one who clings to it pours out abominations.

Therefore the Lord brings upon them unheard-of calamities,

and destroys them completely.

14 The Lord overthrows the thrones of rulers,

and enthrones the lowly in their place.

15 The Lord plucks up the roots of the nations,

and plants the humble in their place.

16 The Lord lays waste the lands of the nations,

and destroys them to the foundations of the earth.

17 He removes some of them and destroys them,

and erases the memory of them from the earth.

18 Pride was not created for human beings,

or violent anger for those born of women. (Ecclesiasticus 10:1-18, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here from October 21, 2004, two years ago (Thursday of the week of the Sunday closest to October 19, Year Two):

The first part of the lesson from Ecclesiasticus characterizes good ruling officials, “a wise magistrate” (Ecclus. 10:1), “the people’s judge” and “his officials,” “the ruler of the city” (v. 2), and the “king” (v. 3). Burton Mack (HarperCollins Study Bible on Sirach 9:17-10:5) suggests that this may be “a veiled polemic” against Israel’s foreign rulers, “against Ptolemaic-Seleucid hegemony.” In the third century B.C.E. Israel was controlled by Hellenistic (Ptolemaic) Egypt, then early in the second century by Hellenistic (Seleucid) Syria. But ben Sira likely remembers the “Last Words of David,” “One who rules over people justly,/ruling in the fear of God,/is like the light of morning,/like the sun rising on a cloudless morning/gleaming from the rain on the grassy land” (2 Sam. 23:3-4). Ben Sira then continues with instructions on the sin of pride (Ecclus. 10:6-18), perhaps a besetting sin of officials and rulers at many levels. “For the beginning of pride is sin,/and the one who clings to it pours out abominations” (v. 13).

Micah 5:1-4, 10-15 (Presbyterian and Lutheran traditions–see the comments for Saturday, October 14, 2006, twelve days ago.)

Revelation 9:1-12

9:1 And the fifth angel blew his trumpet, and I saw a star that had fallen from heaven to earth, and he was given the key to the shaft of the bottomless pit; 2 he opened the shaft of the bottomless pit, and from the shaft rose smoke like the smoke of a great furnace, and the sun and the air were darkened with the smoke from the shaft. 3 Then from the smoke came locusts on the earth, and they were given authority like the authority of scorpions of the earth. 4 They were told not to damage the grass of the earth or any green growth or any tree, but only those people who do not have the seal of God on their foreheads. 5 They were allowed to torture them for five months, but not to kill them, and their torture was like the torture of a scorpion when it stings someone. 6 And in those days people will seek death but will not find it; they will long to die, but death will flee from them.

7 In appearance the locusts were like horses equipped for battle. On their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces, 8 their hair like women’s hair, and their teeth like lions’ teeth; 9 they had scales like iron breastplates, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. 10 They have tails like scorpions, with stingers, and in their tails is their power to harm people for five months. 11 They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon.

12 The first woe has passed. There are still two woes to come. (Revelation 9:1-12, NRSV)

The following comments are repeated here with some revision from October 21, 2004, two years ago (Thursday of the week of the Sunday closest to October 19, Year Two):

Revelation’s fifth trumpet plague (Rev. 9:1-12) is an invasion of “demonic locusts, which combine the terrors of evil spirits and of invading horsemen (probably Parthians)” (Bruce M. Metzger, NOAB, 2^nd ed. on Rev. 9:1-12). It “resembles the locust plague of Ex. 10:4-20 [on Egypt] and is modeled after Joel 2:1-11" (David E. Aune, HarperCollins Study Bible on Rev. 9:1-12). The “king” of the locusts, the “angel of the bottomless pit” is called Abaddon (Hebrew) and Apollyon (Greek). “The name Abaddon, which means ‘Destruction,’ denotes the depths of Sheol (Job 26:6)” (Metzger). There is probably something to be said for Aune’s connecting the name Apollyon to the god Apollo (on Rev. 9:11; cf. the citation from Archillochus Lyr., [VII BC] in BADG, 1979, s.v. Apolluōn), but the Greek word has the form of a participle, Apolluōn, based on apollumi, the word translated “perish” in John 3:16, for example, and so is a translation of the Hebrew Abaddon. We are reminded again that, as God protected the Hebrews from the plague of locusts on the Egyptians, the redeemed are protected from this demonic plague of locusts.

Luke 10:25-37

The Parable of the Good Samaritan (Mt 22.34-40; Mk 12.28-34)

25 Just then a lawyer stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he said, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” 26 He said to him, “What is written in the law? What do you read there?” 27 He answered, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself.” 28 And he said to him, “You have given the right answer; do this, and you will live.”

29 But wanting to justify himself, he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?” 30 Jesus replied, “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 Now by chance a priest was going down that road; and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32 So likewise a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan while traveling came near him; and when he saw him, he was moved with pity. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, having poured oil and wine on them. Then he put him on his own animal, brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii, gave them to the innkeeper, and said, ‘Take care of him; and when I come back, I will repay you whatever more you spend.’ 36 Which of these three, do you think, was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of the robbers?” 37 He said, “The one who showed him mercy.” Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.” (Luke 10:25-37, NRSV)

In the comments for October 23, 2005 (the Sunday closest to October 26, Year One), on the Parable of the Good Samaritan is discussed in relation to Jesus’ answers to questions about the greatest commandments (Mt. 22:34-40; Mk. 12:28-34; Lk. 10:25-28; Deut. 6:4-9; Lev. 19:17-18, 34), with reference also to Jesus’ teaching during his final week in Jerusalem. These are available in the Archive for 2005 under that date (Oct. 23, 2005).

The following comments are repeated here from October 21, 2004, two years ago (Thursday of the week of the Sunday closest to October 19, Year Two), and from May 12, 2005 (Thursday of the week of the Seventh Sunday of Easter, Year One):

In Luke’s Gospel, when Jesus answers the question about the greatest commandment (Lk. 10:25-28; cf. Mt. 22:34-40; Mk. 12:28-31) including “and your neighbor as yourself” (Lev. 19:18), the questioner (a lawyer) follows with “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus responds by telling the Parable of the Good Samaritan. A number of excuses might be offered (and perhaps have been offered) for the behavior of the priest (Lk. 10:31) and the Levite (v. 32) who “passed by on the other side.” The victim might be dead, and to touch him would render them ritually impure, unfit to enter the Temple, which was perhaps their destination. They may have been running late, or they may have considered it inconvenient to stop and help the victim. (Were they concentrating on their prayers?) We might spend time emphasizing the fact that it was a despised foreigner, a Samaritan [an early day Palestinian?], who “was moved with pity” (v. 34) and addressed the victim’s needs. But the simple point of the parable is the need–and the call–to find answers to needy human conditions wherever we find them, genocide, starvation, disease, state-sponsored terrorism, homeless people, and so forth. (May 12, 2005)

Michael Gourgues, (Dominican College, Ottawa, Canada) suggests that “Priests, Levites, and all the people” became a common way to refer to Jewish “religious society in its diversity (“The Priest, the Levite, and the Samaritan Revisited: A Critical Note on Luke 10:31-35, The Journal of Biblical Literature, 117/4 (1998), 710). He finds the substitution of a Samaritan for “all the [Jewish] people” in this phrase remarkable.

Had Jesus addressed the question existed in the mind of the lawyer, Luke’s narrative would have introduced the variant on the side of the victim and not on the side of the passers-by. Love of neighbor. as it was then understood, was to be exercised toward priests, Levites. and true members of Israel, which thus excluded Samaritans. A representative of one of those categories should have taken the role of the neighbor in distress by the wayside. The narrative turns the problem on its head and situates the neighbor not among those who must be loved but among those who are to love. The reversal. already imp1ied by the parable, is made explicit by Jesus’ closing question. “Who is my neighbor?’” the lawyer had asked (10:29). “Who proved himself a neighbor?’ now asks Jesus (10:36).

So why a priest and a Levite? Perhaps the simplest explanation is sociological in nature. The two characters whom the example story of the Good Samaritan first puts on the scene belong to the first two categories of the social hierarchy that dominated post-exilic Judaism. “The priests, the Levites, and all the people of Israel.” According to this traditional tripartite division, one would expect the narrative to bring on stage next a lay Israelite. And so it is totally unexpected to see a ‘Samaritan–a representative of one of the groups that all agreed to exclude from the category of neighbor–come on the scene and provide the answer to the question “Who is my neighbor?” (10:29).

Paradox of paradoxes, it is the Samaritan who, by means of a reversal of roles, becomes the very model of neighborly love. (Gourgues, 713)

Jeanne Stevenson Moessner (Columbia Theological Seminary, Decatur, Georgia) offers perspectives on the Parable of the Good Samaritan from a woman’s perspective (Journal for Preachers, 19.01, pp. 21-25):

In our customary way of reading the Good Samaritan text, women have not acknowledged a crucial aspect to the passage, an aspect so significant that it shatters previous interpretations. The Samaritan finished the journey. The Samaritan finished the journey while meeting the need of a wounded and marginal person. “The Samaritan does not give everything away; in this enigmatic parable, he did not injure, hurt, or neglect the self. He loved himself, and he loved his neighbor.” This balance in the care of self/care of other is a difficult balance for many. It is often women who have excelled in the care of the other. To be able to care for another (others) and to be able to finish one’s journey in life is a message to be proclaimed from the pulpit. (Moessner, 22).

Moessner adds other perspectives, for example:

In application and extension of the “inn” in ministry, the inn may be a support group, a battered women’s shelter, a halfway house, a hospital, a rape crisis center, therapy, a pastoral counseling center, a specialized support group such as Bosom Buddies or Resolve or AA. The inn may be the church. . . . In an exegetical attempt to understand the inn in Luke 10, commentators do agree that the inn was a temporary lodging place, a place where a journeying person found room for the night. This night can surely include the “night of the soul,” a place of struggle and despair. Preaching the Good Samaritan from a feminist perspective brings to the pulpit an awareness of a sense of teamwork and community in ministry and healing. At a minimum, from the sermon itself, a pastor can describe the inn and give directions. (Moessner, 23).

Ronald D. Worden, Ph.D.

rdworden@hgst.edu

rworden@houston.rr.com