Proper 9, Wednesday: Suspicious Peter
Today's Readings:- 1 Samuel 16:1-13 -- Link to NRSV Text
- Acts 10:1-16 -- Link to NRSV Text
- Luke 24:13-35 -- Link to NRSV Text
Cornelius, a centurion in Ceasarea, worship God, who tells him to send for Simon Peter in Joppa. Peter goes into a trance and sees a vision that allows him to eat any animal.
On the same day the women were discovering the empty tomb, two disciples were walking to Emmaus when Jesus meets them and they don't recognize him. They tell Jesus about Jesus and their disappointment. Jesus calls them fools and interprets the prophets for them. They eat and Jesus breaks the bread, reenacting the Last Supper, and Cleopas andhis companion recognize Jesus. They returned to Jerusalem to the Eleven, where they proclaim the risen Christ and His appearing to Peter.
Wait a sec...Two things seem to be odd here. In Acts, Peter goes in a trance (after not eating and praying for a few days) and receives a vision. This is different from other ways God and Jesus appear to people in the Bible. I don't remember anyone else in the Bible going into a trance to have a little tete-a-tete with God. This vision is used to remove all of the ideas of kosher foods, and I agree with it. The whole idea of a strict dietary code isn't to keep the body pure, but to keep the people together and away from outsiders. Very important when your religion is one of many and your people are in constant battle and live among people who worship different gods. I think the full stretch into real monotheism (which I'm not sure we've acheived) requires us to be allowed to eat anything with anyone. Eating together is an act of communion, and not being allowed to eat with someone is shutting them out of your heart. Look at O.J. Simpson. He wasn't allowed to eat with his family on Thanksgiving, and look what happened. So I agree with the doctrine of no dietary laws, but I am suspicious of the origin. Was Peter doing his own thing here? It's tempting for a Progressive to dismiss Peter and Paul, but that is essentially an ad hominem dislike, and doesn't discount what they've said in particular instances. So, remembering this, I think Peter had a good idea and he implemented it.
But back to the suspicion. In Luke, Peter has run off to the tomb to find it empty and there is no mention of him having a vision, until Cleopas comes back with his story and Peter has taken the vision of Mary and the women for himself. Of course, in Luke Mary and the women didn't see Jesus, they saw a couple of angels. It is possible that Jesus was one of the two men and she did not recognize Him, as Cleopas hadn't. So here I see signs of the power struggle to control the emerging Jesus movement after Jesus' death. Peter is doing things to make sure that he is the authority in the movement, and that makes me suspicious of him.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home