Twenty-third Sunday In Ordinary Time
MARK 7:31-37 (Isaiah 35:4-7a; Psalm 146:7, 8-9, 9-10; James 2:1-5)
In last Sunday’s gospel reading Mark informed us that Jesus declared all foods “clean.” The distinction between clean and unclean foods which is given in great detail in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 was abolished. There was still the issue of “unclean” people. The presence of idols (false gods), heathen worship, and disregard for Israel’s purity laws made all foreign lands and their inhabitants unclean. For example, Ezra 9:11, “The land which you are entering, to take possession of it, is a land unclean with the pollutions of the peoples of the lands, with the abomi-nations which have filled it from end to end with their uncleanness.” After the exile, from 538 B.C. on, the excluding nationalism of Judaism became so rigid that anyone who could not prove pure Israelite descent from the tribe of Levi was excluded from the priesthood as unclean. See Ezra 2:62; Nehemiah 7:64. Early Christian theology considered the cleansing of the Gentiles as part of the atoning work of Jesus Christ. See Ephesians 2:11-13.
The catechism which we call the Gospel of Mark had to include catechesis on the issue of clean and unclean because it was still a contentious issue in the last third of the first Christian century when Mark composed his gospel. Mark proceeds as follows. He describes Jesus going to Tyre and Sidon, “unclean” heathen lands on the northwestern coast of Palestine. Next Jesus goes to the Decapolis, a confederation or assemblage of Greek (therefore pagan, heathen, unclean, Gentile) cities. Jesus’ presence in these lands should be considered their cleansing. His presence there in the first third of the century also justified the Christian mission to these lands when Mark composed his gospel.
Although the lands were now clean, that still left “unclean” people. This uncleanness also had to be abolished. “They brought to him a man who was deaf and had a speech impediment,” perhaps stammering, stuttering. Jesus’ concern for the suffering man was remarkably sensitive, “He took him aside from the multitude privately.” Next comes the healing procedure. First Jesus thrust (the correct translation of Mark’s Greek) his fingers into the man’s ears. Then Jesus spat and touched the man’s tongue. In Numbers 12:14 and Deut. 25:9 spitting in someone’s face is a sign of rejection and contempt. If Mark considers this healing as an exorcism, then “Jesus spat” would be a symbol of rejecting the demon who held this victim in his handicaps. Usually interpreters understand Jesus’ action more gently, not as spitting in the man’s face, but taking saliva from his own mouth and putting it on the man’s tongue.
There is some indication of the use of saliva in ancient healing practices. In the gospels we also see Jesus using saliva as a healing agent for blindness, Mark 8:23; John 9:6. The Roman Empe-ror Vespasian, about the time when Mark composed his gospel, was prevailed upon to use his own saliva to cure a man’s blindness. The later Roman historian Tacitus reports success! Only after these symbolic actions against the man’s handicaps, or against the demon who caused or facilitated those handicaps, does Jesus raise his eyes to heaven, as if to call on his Father, the eternal Source of his own being and power. Mark notes that “Jesus groaned.” The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament gives examples of sighing or groaning in magical techniques. It is better to understand the sighing or groaning of Jesus as an expression of his compassion for suffering humanity. John 11 describes similar reaction of Jesus to the death of his friend Lazarus and to the grief of Martha and Mary.
Mark quotes Jesus speaking a command in Aramaic, his native language, “Ephphatha! For his Greek readers Mark translates, “Dianoichtheti!” But that is no help to us. Therefore, “Be opened!” The use of foreign words in stories of healing was common in ancient times. Such words were thought to have some kind of magical quality or force. In this case however the word Ephphatha should be understood as Mark’s preservation of the Aramaic expressions used by Jesus. In Mark’s gospel there are at least six other examples of preserving the words of Jesus in his native language. The effect was instant, “And immediately his ears were opened, and the bond of his tongue was loosened, and he spoke correctly.” Jesus’ method of healing seems both strange and primitive, but it was not so long ago that Catholic priests were directed by the rubrics of the Sacrament of Baptism to perform similar “salivary” actions on the one to be baptized.
It is characteristic of Mark to describe Jesus forbidding any publicity about this healing, “And he ordered them not to tell anyone….” The Good News could not be repressed, “…but the more he ordered them not to, the more freely did they proclaim it.” Jesus’ command to silence can be understood in various ways, but it is probably part of what scholars call Mark’s “Messianic Secret.” Meaning: publicity would prevent a proper understanding of what Jesus was doing by his deeds of power. They could not be properly understood until after his death and resurrection, because those events gave true meaning to his miracles – that his power came from his death and resurrection. Mark closes this episode with the astonishment of the people, who say, “He has done all things well. He even makes the deaf hear and the mute speak.” This echoes Isaiah 35:5-6, (today’s first reading), “Then the eyes of the blind will be opened, and the ears of the deaf will be unstopped. The lame will leap like a deer, and the tongue of the mute will sing for joy.”
