{"id":826,"date":"2011-05-16T08:00:33","date_gmt":"2011-05-16T00:00:33","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.jeffangiegoh.com\/?p=826"},"modified":"2022-04-07T10:22:41","modified_gmt":"2022-04-07T02:22:41","slug":"27-st-mark-making-fig-sandwiches","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.jeffangiegoh.com\/?p=826","title":{"rendered":"32. St Mark Making Fig Sandwiches [Part I]"},"content":{"rendered":"

Part I: Sandwich composition and a soft landing<\/p>\n

And Jesus said to the fig tree, \u201cMay no one eat fruit from you again<\/em><\/strong>\u201d<\/span> [Mark 11:1<\/span>4<\/span>].<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\u00a0\"Image<\/p>\n

[L] Jesus Cursing a Fig Tree<\/em>. James Tissot, c.1890. [R]\u00a0The Purification of the Temple<\/em> by Jacopo Bassano. [Note: An artist who shows cattle and sheep and a whip in Jesus’ hand is influenced by the Johannine narrative.]<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"This reflection gathers some of our thoughts in response to questions people have raised with us concerning the episode of Jesus cursing the fig tree in the Gospels. Their questions centre on what seems to them to be an incomprehensible action on the part of Jesus cursing a fig tree for not producing fruits out of season<\/em>.<\/span><\/p>\n

In response to their questions, we propose a reply in two parts.<\/span><\/p>\n

Part one proceeds from the smaller angle of St Mark\u2019s sandwich composition in 11:12-26 and outlines an interpretation that leads to a “softer” landing.<\/span><\/p>\n

Part two, in the next post, takes a second look at the fig-cursing and Temple-cleansing episodes from the larger angle of Jesus\u2019 pilgrim journey from Galilee to Jerusalem \u2013 towards the Holy Week and the Cross. This second approach will, amongst other things, link up with Pope Benedict XVI’s latest book on Jesus of Nazareth [Part II] and offer an interpretation that takes us to a “harder” landing.<\/span><\/p>\n

Only Mark and Matthew have the cursing of the fig tree, while all 4 Gospels have the cleansing of the Temple. Matthew 21, however, covers both stories in one day, while Mark 11 spreads them over 2 days! While the Synoptic Gospels place the Temple cleansing episode at the end of Jesus\u2019 ministry, towards the Holy Week, John interpolates it right at the beginning of Jesus’ public ministry – right after Cana in chapter 2, and so seemingly unrelated to the Holy Week in the time-line of Jesus’ story. However, from Cana Jesus points to Calvary when he announces that his “hour has not yet come”, the “hour” being his hour of glory when he is lifted up on the Cross and he draws all people to himself. The quick point here is, the various arrangements of the traditions by the four evangelists alert the readers to different theological concerns.<\/span><\/p>\n

So we recall the fact that the sayings and acts of Our Lord were first preserved and handed down from generation to generation in oral traditions. When the Gospel writers sat down to organise their materials into a continuous story, they became a special breed of inspired editors<\/em> of those traditions on the life of Jesus of Nazareth. There is no doubt that they brought to their work a divine inspiration. Equally important, however, is the fact that they also brought to their inspired writings their personal theological lenses. Furthermore, they re-told the life story of Jesus Christ using particular editorial techniques.<\/span><\/p>\n

One of the techniques Mark employed a great deal of is the \u201csandwich technique<\/em><\/strong>\u201d [of the A-B-A structure] by which he would begin telling a story (A), but he would then interpolate other materials by going off on a detour to a seemingly unrelated incident and finish narrating that incident (B) first, before returning to resume the original story (A). The story and that which he sandwiched in between the story ought to be read together, just as a sandwich made up of different components is intended to be consumed as one integrated whole.<\/span><\/p>\n

The fig-cursing story, which people find confusing, is an example of a Markan sandwich in which the cursing story begins in Mark 11:12-14, makes a detour, and continues in verses 20-25, with the story of the cleansing of the Temple (verses 15-19) sandwiched in between. The same incident is recounted in Matthew 21:18-22 without the sandwich. Luke omits this story altogether.<\/span><\/p>\n

The first question that confronts us is: How do we interpret a sandwich composition?<\/span><\/p>\n

The answer, it seems, is easy enough: learn from sandwiches! Sandwiches are pretty much defined by<\/em> the stuffing we put in between two pieces of bread. [Similarly, the Temple-cleansing incident ought to inform our interpretation of the fig-cursing.] In a real sense, the essence of a sandwich is<\/em> in the stuffing. So we call it a peanut<\/em> sandwich, a jam<\/em> sandwich, a ham<\/em> sandwich, an egg and cucumber<\/em> sandwich, and so on. We do not eat a sandwich and refuse the stuffing; or else we might as well just eat two pieces of bread. But, a sandwich is not a sandwich without the two pieces of bread; or else we might just as well have the stuffing only, instead of a sandwich. Besides, there is a variety of bread to choose from and the type of bread is often pretty important too, in yielding the shape, size, texture and even the quality of the sandwich. Like the inner stuffing, the two pieces of outer bread which hold the sandwich together and give it an overall character and taste are really quite indispensable. And so, in a sandwich, every bit counts! The overall and complete package of the sandwich cannot be ignored. [And so, the incidents of fig-cursing and Temple-cleansing may mutually inform and enlighten.]<\/span><\/p>\n

Back to the story, as Jesus and his disciples were on the way back from Bethany to the city of Jerusalem, he felt hungry.\u00a0 Seeing a fig tree with full leaves<\/em><\/strong>, he went over in the hope of finding some fruit which he could eat. Mark says \u201cHe found nothing but leaves<\/strong>.\u201d As editor, Mark supplied the reason for the tree\u2019s fruitlessness: \u201cit was not the season for figs\u201d. And yet, Jesus promptly put a curse of barrenness on the tree: \u201cMay no one ever eat fruit from you again.\u201d Mark also tells us that Jesus’ disciples heard him say that.<\/span><\/p>\n

This is a famous Gospel story, even troubling for many people. So it\u2019s a popular subject for artists. Here’s one by Tissot.<\/span><\/p>\n

Then they continued their journey to Jerusalem. On entering the Temple, Jesus was so angered by all the trading going on in there that he overturned the tables of the money changers and drove the traders out. That incident came to be referred to as the cleansing of the Temple on account of Jesus\u2019 judgment that while God intended the Temple to be a \u201chouse of prayer<\/strong>\u201d, it had been turned into a \u201cden of robbers<\/strong>\u201d. But was not the trading going on in the Temple both<\/em> according to the law of the Temple rules and<\/em> useful to pilgrims?<\/span><\/p>\n