,, Jesus’ entrance into Jerusalem actually echoes a custom that would have been familiar to people living in the Greco-Roman world, when the gospels were written.
Simon Maccabeus was a Jewish general who was part of the Maccabean Revolt that occurred two centuries before Christ, which liberated the Jewish people from Greek rule. Maccabeus entered Jerusalem with praise and palm leaves—making a beeline to the Temple to have it ritually cleansed from all the idol worship that was taking place. With the Jewish people now bearing the brunt of yet another foreign ruler (this time the Romans), Jesus’ parade into Jerusalem—complete with praise and palm leaves—was a strong claim that He was the leader who would liberate the people.
Except that in this case, Jesus isn’t riding a military horse, but a humble donkey. How triumphant is Jesus’ “triumphant entry”—on a donkey He doesn’t own, surrounded by peasants from the countryside, approaching a bunch of Jews who want to kill Him?
And so He enters the Temple. In the Greco-Roman world, the classic “triumphant entry” was usually followed by some sort of ritual—making a sacrifice at the Temple, for example, as was the legendary case of Alexander the Great. Jesus’ “ritual” was to attempt to drive out those making a profit in the Temple.
The chaotic commerce taking place—entrepreneurs selling birds and animals as well as wine, oil and salt for use in Temple sacrifices—epitomized much more than general disrespect. It also symbolised a whole system that was founded on oppression and injustice.
In Matthew, Mark and John, for example, Jesus chose specifically to overturn the tables of the pigeon sellers, since these were the staple commodities that marginalised people like women and lepers used to be made ritually clean by the system. Perhaps it was this system that Jesus was referring to when He accused the people of making the Temple “a den of robbers” (Mt 21.13; Mk 11.17; Lk 19.46).
I am glad to see your addressing Palm Sunday. I wonder how many Evangelicals will let this week pass without consciousness of the Passion of our Lord.
ReplyDelete"A Triumph" was very special parade in Rome. Only the most successful military leaders earned a triumph. Romans prized Honor. "To Triumph" was the dream of a lifetime.
A Triumph followed a specific protocol. Ancient documentation is not available. But generally it went: 1) Senators, 2) Trumpets, 3) the spoils of the war, 4) the defeated king, 5) the ceremonial servants of the man honored, 6) the man himself riding on a chariot pulled by four white horses. 7) The man's army (without their weapons).
As the parade progresses, a slave accompanies the honored man. His job is to whisper in his ear, "Remember that you are mortal." Presumably this is so the Triumph would swell the honored man's head. But heads did of course swell. That is the point of having a Triumph after all.
On Palm Sunday the appropriate point of reflection is this: 1) What is Jesus' Triumph celebrating? and 2) How dare Jesus to present himself with a Triumph! Is he trying to use the Triumph to say something about himself? Or, is he using himself to say something about a Triumph?
My vote is that Jesus' Triumph undermines the meaning on Triumph. He is mocking the pretension of the thing. At the same time is a marker of victory over something. But what?
Kevin:
ReplyDeleteyes! Palm Sunday is overlooked...and subversive! Triumphs over triumph. Is your last question rhetorical, What are your thoughts on what it marked?
http://davewainscott.blogspot.com/2011/11/subverting-palm-sunday.html