Posts Tagged ‘purification’

Jesus’ baptism – complete surrender

January 10, 2026

Baptism of Jesus – 2026

Matthew 3:13-17

Marian Free

Loving God, open our minds to your word, our hearts to your spirit and our lives to your will. Amen.

There are only five verses in today’s gospel, but they contain so many complexities that I am not sure we will get to the bottom of them today.

If you read all four accounts of the baptism of Jesus you will see that there are substantial differences between them which means that each author, or the communities for whom they wrote, has interpreted the story in a way that was helpful for them. What the accounts have in common, is that Jesus came to John and that something called baptism happened. Also, all four gospels try, in some way or another t play down the role of John the Baptist which reflects a certain embarrassment concerning Jesus’ baptism by John. This is most clearly articulated in Matthew’s gospel in which John says – “I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?”   

Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism raises a number of questions for me including:
What is actually happening here? What were the Jewish practices – if any – of baptism? How much has the early church read their practice into the story? What does Matthew’s account of Jesus’ baptism tell us about his agenda? And, for me, the most challenging question: What does it mean when Jesus says: “Let it be so now; for it is proper for us in this way to fulfill all righteousness.”

The beginning of the first century was a time of religious upheaval in Judea. Many Judeans were disillusioned with the Temple and its rituals not least because the priests were political appointees and therefore owed an allegiance to Rome. The Pharisees responded by developing a practice based more on law than ritual and the Essenes withdrew into the desert to practice a more aesthetic version of Judaism. John, and his call for the people to return to God, is representative of this situation. Like the Pharisees and Essenes, he appears to have believed that there was a need for the nation as a whole to purify itself and he does this by calling people to turn their lives around and to wash themselves in the Jordan. That he touched a chord among the people is evidenced by the fact that people from all over the country, including the Pharisees, Sadducees and even soldiers and tax collectors came to him for baptism.

I use the word “wash” because this word more accurately represents Jewish practice and the meaning of the Greek word – baptizo. To really grasp what is happening we have to remember that a person was a Jew by virtue of birth. There is little evidence of Jewish evangelism in the first century and what we call “baptism” was not a rite of entry into the Jewish faith. Immersion in water was a rite of purification and there were a number of pools at the Temple for this purpose. This was a personal action and did not require anyone else to be present. John’s call for people to immerse themselves in the Jordan indicates a rejection of the Temple and its practices. The Jordan had the further advantage in that it symbolised a movement from wandering in the desert to life in the promised land.

John calls the people to “repent because the kingdom of heaven has come near.”   “Repent,” the translation of the Greek “metanoia,” is commonly understood to mean being sorry for one’s sins (as it is in our form of the Confession). In its original context however it simply meant to turn around. In calling people to repent John – then Jesus – was challenging people to stop going their own selfish way and to turn around, to return to God. This means that we don’t have to worry about a sinless Jesus being baptised to cleanse him from his sins. Instead, we can see that baptism, immersion in water by or in the presence of John, was for Jesus, a public declaration of his willingness to give his life entirely into the hands of God.

At the beginning of his public ministry, Jesus has come to John in order to demonstrate his complete submission to God and his readiness to live a life directed by God’s will and not his own.

We still have to explain the mysterious statement that we find only in Matthew’s gospel. In response to John’s objection Jesus justifies his baptism by saying that it is “to fulfill all righteousness.” Matthew is fond of both expressions “fulfill” and “righteousness. He wants to make it clear that Jesus is the fulfillment of scripture and also that a key characteristic of the Kingdom of Heaven is righteousness.  

Righteousness is a difficult term to define, especially as we commonly use the word to refer to the observance of a religious or ethical norm. Being “righteous” in our minds is associated with being “good.” In Old Testament terms though and in Matthew’s usage, righteousness refers to a quality of God – God’s dispensation of justice and salvation, or as Albright and Mann suggest, it is a term that refers to “the whole purpose of God for his (sic) people”[1]. It is God who makes righteous. Righteousness as Paul makes clear is not earned but is a gift. So, when Jesus states that his baptism by John is to “fulfill all righteousness” he is saying that his submission to the ritual of washing demonstrates his complete identification with God and God’s purpose for God’s people. Through him, God’s purpose for God’s people will come to fruition and as a consequence, “all righteousness will be fulfilled”. Through his baptism, Jesus makes it clear that he is the prototype of the peopel we are all called to be.

Through his baptism by John, Jesus signals his complete submission to the will of God and his desire to have no life of his own but only a life that is given over completely to the will of God, directed by the presence of God within.

Our modern practice of baptism with its emphasis on turning from sin is a poor imitation of Jesus’ baptism. Kingdom people are people who have utterly surrendered their lives and their wills to God.

What are we prepared to surrender in order for God’s righteousness to be fulfilled?

 

[1] Albright, W. F. and Mann, C. S. (1971). Matthew: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Sydney: The Anchor Bible, Doubleday, 31.

Hezekiah’s tunnel which directs water to the Pool of Siloam – one of the pools for ritual washing at the Temple.
Steps leading to Pool of Siloam

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in baptism, Matthew | Comments Off on Jesus’ baptism – complete surrender

Our bodies – God’s interface with the world

December 30, 2023

Holy Family

(Initially written for the series When Women Preach. If you’d like to hear it in my voice go to https://australianwomenpreach.com.au/)

Luke 2:22-30

Marian Free

In the name of God, Earth-maker, Pain-bearer, Life-giver. Amen.

The Book of Common Prayer provided the liturgical resources for the world-wide Anglican Church   up until 1975. It included a rite called the Churching of Women   (latterly known as Thanksgiving after the Birth of a Child.) This rite is based on Leviticus 12:2-8 which refers to the purification of women after childbirth. It is worth quoting the text in full as it lies behind the gospel set for today; “If a woman conceives and bears a male child,   she shall be ceremonially unclean seven days;    as at the time of her menstruation, she shall be unclean.   On the eighth day   the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.    Her time of blood purification shall be thirty-three days;    she shall not touch any holy thing, or come into the sanctuary, until the days of her purification are completed.  If she bears a female child, she shall be unclean two weeks, as in her menstruation;    her time of blood purification shall be sixty-six days. When the days of her purification are completed, whether for a son or for a daughter,   she shall bring to the priest      at the entrance of the tent of meeting    a lamb in its first year for a burnt offering,    and a pigeon or a turtledove for a sin offering.”

Though the Anglican service does not use the language of purification, it was known colloquially as “the rite for the purification of women” and, in some parts of Australia was still practiced in the 1960’s.  I can still remember someone telling me of the humiliation that she felt at having to undergo the ritual, the sense of degradation that came from an understanding that somehow her God given body, the body that had given life to another, was considered impure by the church community in which she worshipped. 

It was not only birth that was considered to render a woman unclean. In Old Testament times and, in some contemporary cultures, menstruation was/is viewed as a source of impurity that required women to separate themselves from their community during the time of their period. This is also based on Leviticus which tells us that anyone who touches a menstruating woman will be unclean until evening. {And} The woman herself is considered to be unclean for seven days. And anyone who touches her,   or who touches something that she has touched in that time   is likewise thought to be unclean.

In the church, attitudes to women’s bleeding have varied through the centuries, but Leviticus 12 continued to influence the opinions of some. For example, in the seventh century, Bishop Theodore of Canterbury stated that: “During the time of menstruation women should not enter into church or receive communion.”

While this sounds archaic to modern ears, it was one of the reasons that women continued to be excluded from the sanctuary. In living memory, flower arrangers, had to leave their vases on the sanctuary steps so that they could be put into place by a male churchgoer. (This was true whether they were menstruating at the time or not). (And) As recently as the 1980’s a bishop (who was very much in favour of the ordination or women), shared with me that he had a lingering (if irrational) sense of discomfort that a priest who might be menstruating could be presiding at Holy Communion.

In our day and age, it seems an extraordinary idea that menstrual blood could be seen to render a woman unclean, that the source of all human life could be understood as a cause for impurity and that the act of birth could likewise render a woman impure. 

In today’s gospel, Mary and Joseph bring themselves to do that which is required by the Torah (Lev 12). There is so much detail in these verses – the offering of the doves, Simeon’s gratitude, Anna’s excitement, Simeon’s song and prophecy – that it is easy to overlook why the couple are there – for Mary to undergo a process of purification – and that after having given birth to God’s very self. (A detail balanced only by fact that God did not consider a woman’s body an unworthy vessel for the Saviour of the world.)

Sadly, there has developed in Christendom a distrust of the body which is seen as the origin of desire, passion and sin. Our relationship with our bodies is complex. Without our bodies we do not exist, but bodies can be weak, frail, and broken. They do not always perform as we would wish. Bodies come with physical needs     and our natural bodily functions cannot always be controlled and are often experienced as a source of inconvenience, discomfort, or embarrassment.

Mary’s body is the reason that the family go to the Temple, but hers is not the only body.  In this short vignette, we have infant bodies and aged bodies, fertile bodies and infertile bodies, female bodies and male bodies, bodies losing their functionality and bodies that have yet to learn how to self-regulate.  Jesus’ body is small, vulnerable, and dependent. Mary’s body is young and strong and fertile and unclean. Anna’s is long past the time of being able to bear children yet is still filled with life and energy. Simeon is ready to abandon his body in death but before he does, he takes the embodied God into his arms. 

For all their frailty and inconvenience, it is our bodies that give us existence and it is “the body with its appetites, its pleasures and all its various functions    that God has chosen to make his love known among us”.[1] God’s very self did not despise the human body but chose to inhabit it and to share in all its fullness, in all the messiness of human existence: “he became like his brothers and sisters in every respect.” (Hebrews 2:14-18)

However we try to sanitise our scriptures, however we try to separate our physical bodies from the life of the spirit, we cannot ignore the fact that the gospels themselves are earthy and bodily. From Jesus’ bloody, violent, and messy birth, to his bloody, violent and messy death the Incarnation is proof positive that holiness and bodilness cannot be separated, that our bodies are not to be despised but to be treasured as the place in which God did and does make God’s home.

Jesus’ birth, Jesus’ presentation in the Temple, Jesus’ life and death, and even his scarred resurrection body, are all evidence that Jesus fully embraced the human condition – that God in Jesus was vulnerable and in control, weak and strong, sorrowful and joyful – “like us in every respect”. 

Our bodies, our frail, imperfect bodies are God’s interface with the world. Our bodies, our very human bodies, were and are the dwelling place of God for whom no task is too mundane, no activity too ordinary, no function unspeakable and no part impure. 

“Let us glorify God in our bodies.”

{In 2011, Colleen Fulmer uploaded this song to You Tube

We are the body of Christ,

birthing, feeding,

touching, weeping. 

We are the body of Christ,

mending, bleeding,

healing, dancing,

Glorify God in our bodies.

Dance with God in our lives.

Colleen Fulmer, 2011

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=we+are+the+body+of+Christ%2C+glorify+God+in+our+bodies+-+lyrics&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:ba648b42,vid:XOKJVxJguug,st:0

[1] (The. Message Devotional Bible: featuring notes and reflections from Eugene H. Peterson, (Colorado Springs, CO: Nav Press,  2018) 3563, Kindle.

Tags:, , , ,
Posted in Holy Family | Comments Off on Our bodies – God’s interface with the world

Jesus at a wedding

January 19, 2013

Epiphany 2, 2013

Wedding at Cana – John 2:1-11

Marian Free

 

In the name of God who showers us with abundant blessings and reveals himself to us through his Son Jesus. Amen.

 

I don’t need to tell you that I know a great deal about weddings. Not only do I conduct numerous weddings but I had a hand in planning my wedding and have been involved in the planning of my children’s weddings. Even quite simple ceremonies take quite a deal of planning. A bare minimum requires the signing of the Notice of Intent at least one month before the ceremony, arranging a celebrant a venue and two witnesses. Anything more elaborate also involves deciding on the number of guests, sending invitations, choosing music, booking a reception centre, selecting a menu, organizing a cake, making or purchasing a dress, hiring or buying a suit, buying shoes and flowers, planning the seating arrangements, thinking of and inviting someone to be an MC and hopefully planning a honeymoon. For those who want to go to more trouble cars need to be hired, a photographer booked, wedding favours made or purchased, bridesmaid’s dresses made or bought and the list goes on (and on).  No wonder people find it stressful, I’m exhausted just listing what needs to be done!

Weddings in the first century were quite different, but I presume that they also required a great deal of planning. From what we can re-create from the literature available, it appears that in the first century all of the village would have been invited and the festivities would have lasted for seven days. The celebrations would have started, not at 3pm at an appointed time, but whenever the friends of the bridegroom arrived with the bride. One can only imagine the sort of organisation that would go into such an event. Feeding a large crowd over a number of days would involve a considerable amount of preparation – beasts would have to be chosen, slaughtered, prepared, and cooked, bread and sweets would have to be made and enough wine procured. Other arrangements such as dowries would have had to have been settled long beforehand.

It is interesting that the first event in Jesus’ life that is recorded by the author of John’s gospel is that of a wedding not a healing. What is more, the story raises a number of questions – not least of which is why the hosts ran out of wine. Were the groom’s parents really so unprepared as to not have enough to drink, or was it, as some suggest, that Jesus and the disciples did not observe the tradition of bringing a contribution to the festivities? Other questions arise: Whose wedding was it? Why was Mary concerned about the lack of wine if she was not the host? Why does Jesus address his mother in such an abrupt way: “woman”? Scholars have had a field day with the question of Mary’s interference in the festivities. It is this story that has led to the theory (used by Dan Brown) that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene. If this were the case, it would explain Mary’s concern with the wine – she is the host of the celebration. It is her responsibility to have catered adequately for the party, it is her reputation that will be harmed if she proven to be an inadequate host. This is why Mary notices the shortfall and looks to Jesus for a solution.

Commentaries on John’s gospel provide answers to some of these questions, but the real key to the story lies not in the specific details, but in the evangelist’s purpose in recording it. The heart of the account is not Jesus’ relationship with his mother, nor is it the miracle itself, nor even the vast quantity of wine that results. The last line of the story tells us that its primary purpose is the revelation of the person of Jesus – to the disciples who are present and to those who will read the account later.

From start to finish, the author of John’s gospel is intent on making known that Jesus is the one who is to come, the one sent by God to bring salvation to the world and eternal life to those who believe. As we learn in chapter 20, John’s gospel is written: “so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have life in his name.” So the purpose of the first of Jesus’ miracles recorded by John is to bring people to faith in him.

Unlike the Synoptic Gospels which begin with Jesus’ healing the sick and casting out demons, John begins with a wedding and a miracle of abundance. What is not readily obvious to us will have been clear to Jesus’ disciples and would certainly have been plain to those for whom the Gospel was written. Through the use of symbol and allusion, John portrays Jesus as the one who will bring the redemption promised by God. For example, as today’s reading from Isaiah indicates, marriage is a sign of the restoration of Israel – the people will be the bride and God the groom, their shame will be taken away and they will be able to hold their heads high among the people. A wedding and a feast imply that Jesus is the one who was to come.

Elsewhere, Jesus speaks of the danger of putting new wine into old wine skins. Wine replacing water is suggestive of a new and different era replacing the old. Lastly, the water to which Jesus refers is stored in stone jars, jars which because they were not porous and could not be contaminated, held the water used for the ritual of purification. John’s readers would have understood the illusion – Jesus’ salvific action replaces the need for repeated ritual purification. Through Jesus, the people have been put right with God for all time.

In the written account at least, and possibly in the actual event, all of these images would have spoken to the disciples of the fact that God, through Jesus, was doing something new. Something that has been pointed to by the prophets was now a reality in the life and presence of Jesus. Through allusions to OT expectations John presents Jesus as God’s answer to all that has been promised. He suggests that through Jesus the relationship between the people and God has been healed, the promised banquet has begun, the forsakennness of Israel has been supplanted by marriage and that because of Jesus the need for purification has become redundant.

So you can see, there is so much more to this wedding than a miracle. The wedding allows Jesus glory to be revealed which in turn leads to the disciples’ belief in him. The revelation of Jesus in John’s gospel has one purpose and one alone, that those who see and those who hear come to believe that Jesus is the Son of God.

A miracle-worker does not change the world. Someone who turns water into wine does not bring about the salvation of humankind. The extraordinary thing about Jesus, as John’s gospel will make clear over and over again, is that he and the Father are one and that through him, the world is redeemed and the relationship with God is restored.

Tags:, , , , , , , ,
Posted in Epiphany, John's Gospel | Comments Off on Jesus at a wedding