“Rule breaker?”

By Rev. Michael Stonhouse

Meditation – Saturday, January 14, 2023

Mark 2:23-3:6 (Forward, p. 77) CEV p. 1028

One of the frequent conversations that I often have, both within myself and with others, is whether it is ever ‘permissible’ to break rules or regulations. I ask this, especially in the case of extenuating circumstances. For instance, what about driving above the speed limit when passing a slower vehicle that is just below the speed limit and has backed up considerable traffic when adhering to the posted speed limit to pass would ‘take forever’ and lead to considerable risks? I have never received an ‘official’ response to this question—but, then, I have never asked either.

However, it does relate back to the question of whether it is ever ‘permissible’ (or right) to break rules or regulations put into place by some human authority. That was exactly the question that was faced twice by Jesus in today’s passage.

In the first situation, His disciples absently mindedly picked a few heads of wheat as they passed by a grain field, something that was perfectly alright according to the Law. But seeing as this had taken place on the Sabbath this was absolutely forbidden. Inadvertently, they had managed, in one foul swoop, just by picking the grain, removing the husks, throwing them away, and then eating the grain, to transgress the regulations by performing four actions that were not allowed on the Sabbath: reaping, winnowing, threshing and preparing a meal. No, according to the rabbinic laws and regulations, all of these actions constituted work and therefore were not allowed.

In the second instance, there was a man in the synagogue on the Sabbath who had a crippled hand. Almost certainly, he had been plagued with this malady for some time, with the almost inevitable result that he was painfully limited in terms of employment, social encounters, and even the most basic of manual tasks or endeavours. However, there was absolutely no threat to his actual life—otherwise, Jesus’ action on the Sabbath would have been perfectly allowable. Yes, Jesus would have been permitted to stop him from dying, but no more. With a wound, for instance, it was okay to apply a tourniquet to staunch the bleeding, but not to apply a bandage or salve to promote healing.

The underlying problem with both cases is that the rules or regulations, or least the present interpretation of the same, were subject to three problems or issues:

a) Firstly, as ‘fence laws’ intending to make it ‘impossible’ for anyone to get close enough to working on the Sabbath to transgress it, they had wholly missed their mark. Picking a few heads of wheat could hardly be considered ‘harvesting’ in any real sense, and certainly could not be said to lead to actually doing so. And likewise, an isolated case of healing a crippled man on the Sabbath could hardly be considered to be an instance of the practice of medicine;

b) Secondly, these rules and regulations totally ignored—or, in some cases, actually avoided—a call to respond positively and constructively to human need. But as Jesus pointed out in an episode with a crippled woman (see Luke 13:10-17), these same critics were quite happy and content, even proactive, in looking after their livestock and care for them on the Sabbath.

c) And finally, and most importantly, there was the question of why God had instituted the Sabbath in the first place. The Sabbath had been put into place by God for a purpose, and that was to make life fuller and happier for us humans. The purpose in outlawing work on that day was not to make life more complicated for us, but rather, to give us humans a day of rest and therefore be more relaxed, complete and healthy. So, rather than being a slave to rules we were to enjoy and make use of a provision that God had put into place for our own good.

So, to go back to our original question about rules and regulations—yes, even those rules and regulations that seem to govern church life--we need to re-examine their purpose and intent and consider whether they still ‘work’ (or indeed ever did). (And, in the case of the church, to consider whether they actually came from God, or simply arose by custom or habit or human reasoning or preferences. I mention this specifically with the church for I suspect that many of our informal ‘rules’ have little to do with God and more to do with our comfort level or culture or the ‘way we’ve always done it’)

Sad to say, this is probably a ‘moving target’, one where many people would like hard and fast, fixed rules, rather than something that has to be worked out as we go. But, in terms of meeting human need, which seems to be Jesus’ primary motivation, this seems to be the way to go. So, the best thing to do is to simply to wait for His leading and guidance, and then do as He says. Amen.

Forward notes: “Is it lawful to do good or to do harm on the sabbath, to save life or to kill?” (chapter 3, verse 4a)

“Abel is often described as the first murder victim in the Bible. His brother Cain kills him out of jealousy, denies knowing what happened, and then sarcastically asks God, ‘Am I my brother’s keeper?’ A dear Jewish teacher of mine once paraphrased the whole of scripture and the rabbinic tradition that follows as God answering Cain’s rhetorical question: Yes, says God. Yes, you are your brother’s keeper.

“In Mark’s Gospel, we get a glimpse into the rabbinic discussion about what is lawful to do on the sabbath. The debates are long but ultimately conclude that saving a life is more important than any other religious obligation. For our Jewish siblings, human life is elevated above ritual, even on the sabbath. Through Jesus and the Pharisees’ debates, we see the ways that early Jewish communities and early Christian communities both agreed and disagreed on how to apply scripture to our everyday lives.

MOVING FORWARD: “How would you distill scripture into a single phrase? Does ‘You are your brother’s keeper’ resonate with you?”