‘And the curtain of the temple was rent in two from top to bottom.’ (Mark 15:38) Photo: Manos Gkikas / Unsplash.
A curtain call: Janet Scott reads from the gospel of Mark
‘And the curtain of the temple was rent in two from top to bottom.’ (Mark 15:38)
In his account of the crucifixion of Jesus, Mark does an extraordinary thing. Between the verse which says that Jesus died and the verse reporting the reaction of the centurion, he takes us away from Golgotha over to the Temple Mount, to tell us about the destruction of a curtain. This verse placement indicates that it is significant. We can see several layers of meaning, each of which can add depth to our understanding.
The first is that this is the climax of the temple theme that has run through the passion narrative. Jesus is presented as in opposition to the temple. In chapter 11 (12-21 onwards) the destruction of a fig tree surrounds and comments on the cleansing of the temple, an action which leads the religious authorities to seek to destroy Jesus. In chapter 13:1-2 he predicts the destruction of the temple. The matter is raised at his trial (14:57-9) when Mark makes it clear that statements that Jesus will destroy the temple are false, and in 15:29-30 it is part of the mockery of Jesus on the cross. In this theme the tearing of the curtain is proleptic of the destruction of the temple, signifying that its fate is determined. (Mark’s audience would know that it happened in the year we call 70 AD.) The structure of the sentence makes it clear that it is God who will bring about the destruction: it does this through a passive voice in which the actor is implied and through the phrase ‘from top to bottom’ which implies that the action comes from above.
A second layer draws attention to the temple as hierarchical space, where different groups of people had different levels of access, with only the high priest able to enter the most holy space. The curtain was a barrier and its destruction opens up the space and opens access to God to all people. Though an alternative suggestion is that the removal of the barrier lets God out of the temple, free to be found anywhere in the world.
Another layer is to notice that this verse echoes the account of the baptism of Jesus (1:10) when the heavens are rent apart and the Holy Spirit descends. The link is the verb translated ‘rent’, in Greek schízein, to tear, with a sense of violence. The verb gives us our word ‘schism’. In this gospel these two verses mark the start and the finish of the ministry of Jesus. They both report the action of God and act as ‘God’s apostrophes’ around the story. It is no accident that in each case the rending is followed by the statement, first from heaven and at the end from the centurion, that Jesus is the son of God. One commentator suggests that the verbal link implies that just as the Spirit descended in the first story, it is the same Spirit that enables the centurion to make his statement.
I like to link both of these to the third use of the word ‘rent’ in the gospel, though this time as a noun. In 2:21 a very short parable speaks of putting a new patch on an old garment – it makes the tear worse. This link enables us to suggest that Mark is telling us that something new has happened which will tear up the old ways: the new will come bursting through.
Comments
Yes, Mark 15:38 (Janet Scott: A Curtain Call, 16 May 2019) is one of the key clues to what Jesus the Christ/Messiah was all about. Parallel with the schizein rent is the way Jesus talks about bringing a mighty two-edged sword, separating the old from the new, followers from die-hard stick-in-the-mud adherents to the old rituals and hierarchy, even dividing families, resulting in schisms. We still have schisms between different groups/denominations of so-called Christians, and between Christians and other Believers – who slavishly, and often violently, cling to the very divisions Jesus and God/Allah didn’t want us to keep or enter into!
We have tended to minimise His powerful message of freedom, release, change and reality. We are to do away with paid priests controlling the populace. God is not locked up in an elaborate church building, someone we have to ask to ‘hear our prayer’ on Sundays. The ‘church’ is the people who follow and worship God. So shouldn’t our church buildings be straightforward shelters from the elements – especially here in Britain? In Africa and elsewhere, a spreading tree is ideal for giving shade, just like ancient spiritual gatherings under a great tree almost everywhere. Weren’t the first Quaker ‘Meetings’ held in the open? Just like many gatherings around Jesus Himself? The first ‘church buildings’ were believers’ homes – until the congregations outgrew them.
Where Quaker buildings are used the rest of the week for community or other purposes, or where Meetings are held in someone else’s premises (rented or borrowed), I believe we’re doing the right thing. Many of our beautiful ecclesiastical buildings are a valuable part of our cultural and spiritual heritage, and they shouldn’t be pulled down or neglected – but should we always spend millions/billions on them instead of ending poverty and homelessness?
Similarly, as Janet Scott points out, telling the whole world that we, the ordinary people, have direct access to God, without the need for priests having to do it all for us, was another key part of Jesus’ message.
“You are all priests!” He tells us. “Do not worship Me! Give thanks to God only, Who gives you all you need before you ask. Listen to what God wants you to do, how you’re supposed to live and help each other. Let yourselves be guided day-by-day, and then DO what you hear or see God laying out on the Path you’re to follow.” That’s precisely how Jesus showed his Followers to live.
We Quakers devote an hour on Sundays to listening to God – instead of ‘making a joyful noise unto The Lord’ while telling Him (it’s still Him) what we want Him to do. But do we actually listen? Do we hear? Do we go off and do what we’ve been told?
In Initiatives of Change, we tend to devote an hour every day to listening and discerning God’s will and purpose for us that day. Not tomorrow or vaguely in the future. “Give us today what we need for today,” we pray in The Lord’s Prayer (without saying ‘please’). Manna was supplied during the Exodus ‘one day at a time’. “Take no thought for tomorrow – tomorrow may not come (for you).” Jesus got His instructions from God fresh each day, in a quiet place away from distractions. We have direct access to God, so let’s make that an ever-open 24/7 personal telephone line, and live the relationship we were created to have with our Creator!
[If you’d like to print this as a follow-up article, please do. I’ve been thinking of writing in to this effect, but now seems the right time to stimulate an ongoing conversation in The Friend . . .]
By Jonathan R on 19th May 2019 - 17:17
Please login to add a comment
