Mass Readings for the 32nd Sunday in Ordinary Time:
1 Kings 17.10-16 Psalm 146.6-10 Hebrews 9.24-28 Mark 12.38-44
Who were “the scribes?” And why didn’t they like Jesus?
Well, like all the others who opposed our Lord, who ultimately sought to kill him; they saw him as a threat. A threat to their power, their social position, their self-understanding as important, indeed vital to society, and so deserving of privilege, expecting that the common people, and to some degree those in authority, show them deference and respect.
We hear mention of them repeatedly in the gospels. Jesus in today’s gospel calls them out as undeservedly privileged and insufferably pompous.
We hear about these scribes often in connection with other groups: “the scribes and the pharisees,” and “the priests and the scribes.”
There were a lot of identifiable groups opposed to our Lord: the Pharisees and the Sadducees; and in past homilies I’ve said we can think of those groups as something close to being political parties, but mindful that religion is huge part of the culture, so they also represent interpretations of Judaism.
There were the Herodians, those aligned with the family of Herod the Great, more political in character. There were the priests, obviously to the religious side of things, and jealous of their prerogatives, and defensive when it came to matters affecting the Temple in Jerusalem.
Of course, there were the Romans, the imperial masters who all of the aforementioned groups resented to a greater or lesser degree.
And then there were these scribes; and we can guess at who they were based on what we know of the ancient world, and the observation that being a scribe involves reading and writing and in the ancient world few people were literate. So, we know these were valuable skills. To possess them was to be a valued member of society; that this brought prestige, influence, power.
Scribes were more than just stenographers, copiers of documents. This profession overlaps a great deal with those who are referred to in the gospels as “lawyers.”
Scribes were the best educated, best informed, they were the “experts” upon whom kings and princes, any large institution like the Jerusalem Temple, would rely for accurate information, analysis of science, interpretation of law. The wideness of the scope of their expertise might seem impossibly broad, but we need to remember that information was not as we have it today, everywhere and overwhelming. Rather it was the case that it was hard to find, and preserve. It was an important aspect of scribal work to compile collections of written material—libraries of everything from tax records to philosophical and scientific treatises. You couldn’t go to a “search engine” on your browser, like Duck Duck Go, or that other one, “giggle” I think it’s called. So, in a way like today’s “big tech” scribes were keepers and controllers of information.
We know that some scribes were also Pharisees, some were Sadducees, some were supporters of the House of Herod. So, scribes were engaged in the great questions of the day from more than one perspective—they identified with some of the other factions. So, while the ideal with them, as with today’s public servants, ought to be of detached bureaucrats who serve with no particular political interest, that was no more the case then than it is today.
But strictly considering them as scribes, what was their opposition to Jesus based upon?
Well, Jesus has no problem with being well-educated. He’s got no issue with someone being a public servant, a corporate bureaucrat, a government functionary, an expert from the university or from some level of officialdom. Expertise is something societies need; the problems of a society tend to complexity, and we know all too well that few political leaders have the wisdom of Solomon. Yet even if they possessed such wisdom, they’d still need good information, informed opinions to work from in finding solutions.
For Jesus, the problem is that once you perceive yourself to be “essential” you cannot use that for your own ends, for your personal gain, to accrue power, to build yourself up and put yourself above others.
So, experts in whatever field, bureaucrats of whatever department of government, these all should be people who understand their vocation as one of humble service; and this is, of course, the common vocation that we all share in. Disciples of Christ live in humility, and offer their gifts, be they physical or intellectual, in service of the good of others, and to the glory of God.
The power and authority of any “expert” class, any group whose services are regarded as valuable, good, and actually necessary to a society, must be balanced by a careful mindfulness on the part of those who belong to that group. Those whose services are “essential” can’t use their position to think themselves more deserving than others, or exempt from social obligations such as basic courtesy and respect for others regardless of their occupation, their social status. They shouldn’t extort wealth, power and privilege from others. They cannot presume that laws and regulations don’t apply to them, that these are just for “the little people.”
We get some of that attitude in political leadership coming from the mistaken belief that the public cannot do without their skills as members of parliament, cabinet ministers and such.
I’ve noted a change in the rhetoric in recent years that sees politicians arguing, not that my ideas are better than those of the other parties, but rather, if you don’t vote for me, the world is going to end; me and my party must have power to avert catastrophe. It casts our political decisions as a voting public in very dramatic terms. I’m glad that not too many people take that too seriously, but I often sense that some in public life actually believe what they are saying.
When those “experts” among us, those who we consult, seek advice from, enter into that mindset, it is a dangerous thing. To cast themselves as our saviours, and to make the presumption that the common people lack the intelligence to make the right decision, and so decision-making rights must be taken away leads us in the direction of technocracy – rule by experts, which is a move away from the messiness of democratic processes, but in no way guarantees the decisions will be better.
When the scribes encounter Jesus, they were likely rather dismissive: here’s some country bumpkin who sat out in the sun too long and now thinks he’s a prophet… but then they hear him, and discover he is no village idiot, but a man who knows what he’s talking about, speaks with authority they are intrigued and worried. Why? Well, he has no credentials!
One of my favourite people I encountered at university was a lady by the name of Ursula Franklin. She was in her time a rarity, an engineer and leading research in the area of metallurgy. In 1989 she delivered the Massey Lecture; a rather prestigious address that published in book form entitled, The Real World of Technology.
Franklin argued that today’s technologies discourage critical thinking and promote “a culture of compliance”. You know, “everything is too complicated” for you and I to understand, so just do as your told, accept how things are; you’re not qualified to comment.
Yet, she would argue that’s hardly the case. People, even of relatively low IQ can tell when something’s wrong; when animals are suddenly growing sick and dying and there’s a factory that’s started pumping effluent into the river upstream; when children no longer seem to be learning how to read or do basic math, something’s up with the schools and their curriculum; when supply chains break down, as they are doing now, it’s the truck driver who can tell you why it’s happened while the regulatory agencies and departmental analysts find themselves overwhelmed by the data and pressured by politicians for that simple solution that makes the problem go away.
The scribes of Jesus’ time were the experts, but their knowledge didn’t make the lives of the people any better, their learning was not rescuing Israel – they were no part of the solution.
In counterpoint to the scribes Jesus points out the old woman giving her two pennies into the Temple treasury. She’s very much meant to stand in contrast to the men in fine robes taking the best seats, expecting everyone to move out of their way. All she has to offer is her faith and her humble prayers. And yet she is the model for us. She does not put her faith in her abilities, in her social position, in her wealth because she possesses little in the way of any of these things. Her abilities are lessened by age, her social position negligible, her wealth obviously meagre. Yet she has faith enough to sacrifice what she has, and hope enough that it makes a difference – and it does, for on that day she is seen by her Saviour who uses her good example to show us all how we ought to be. From whatever we have, we give to God and ask him to direct us. And the affirmation we should seek is not the praise of the world, the deference of others, but rather the quiet word of the Holy Spirit whispered in our ears: blessed are you, poor in spirit, for yours is the kingdom of heaven.
Amen.