Mark 9.37-40: Performing miracles in Christ's name

[Ken McRae]

Mark 9:37-40

[37] Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
[38] And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us.
[39] But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me.
[40] For he that is not against us is on our part.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

I've moved the above to this location in its own thread, to invite any discussion on the interpretation of this passage in the fathers.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Matthew Panchisin]

Dear Father Deacon Matthew,

That's good as long as its not a bait and switch situation for the Orthodox Christians to suffer. After all, all suffering is not always the same or even necessarily good.

In Christ,

Matthew Panchisin

[M.C. Steenberg]

It is best to see this small set of verses in their fuler context:

Now John answered Him, saying, “Teacher, we saw someone who does not follow us casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow us.” But Jesus said, “Do not forbid him, for no one who works a miracle in My name can soon afterward speak evil of Me. For he who is not against us is on our side. For whoever gives you a cup of water to drink in My name, because you belong to Christ, assuredly, I say to you, he will by no means lose his reward.

“But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea. If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where 'Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’ And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life lame, rather than having two feet, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched— where ' Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’ And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye, rather than having two eyes, to be cast into hell fire—where ‘ Their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched.’
Following Christ involves ensuring that one's behaviour and words do not lead 'these little ones' astray. Doing miracles in Christ's name may make it hard to speak evil of him soon after; but leading 'these little ones' astray is worse than 'a millstone hung around the neck, and being thrown into the sea.'

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Ken McRae]

It is best to see this small set of verses in their fuler context:

That is quite true, to be sure. We may discern, then, from the general context of verses 35-50, that verses 38-40 are, in fact, about the essentials of true Christianity itself; as expounded by St. James in these terms: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." (Ja 1:27) In verse 37, Jesus begins to open to them the mystery of what it means for a soul to receive Christ; that whatever else we might think or imagine true religion to consist in, at the very heart of it, it is about our receiving Him and his Father by faith.

It is within this very dynamic context of what it means spiritually to receive Christ that John raises this question of apostolic succession, and how to think about those living and ministering outside the boundaries of the "canonical" Church. According to the context, the apostles had argued among themselves who should be the greatest. So, we can see how far back that particular dispute originates: Is Peter the greatest? Or is it James? But what of the Theologian, John? Who is it? Now, it is clear from this that there was no concensus among them, about who would be the leader. According to this text, it was still an open debate.

Now, I find it very fascinating that Christ does not here herald Peter, before all the others, as the undisputed Rock upon which the Church would stand the tests of time. Instead, he quite significantly states that: "If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all." In other words, if Peter would be first, let him learn to be last; and the same applies to all; for the first shall be last, and the last first. He that would be the greatest must learn to deny himself the most, and put himself last of all! We may discern from this the connection or relationship between true spiritual growth and ecclesiastical authority.

John says he rejected the "unknown" Exorcist for his "non-conformity," but Christ says that John should have judged the man's conformity to Christ according to a more charitable rule; and not only so, but that even the "conformists" strictly speaking, who followed John and the other apostles, after the outward man, that even they would be judged after another manner, according to their spirit of obedience and the mortification of their bodies. Here we may see that true religion consists not in some kind of external conformity to the outward ceremonies and traditions of men, but in the power of godliness and the conformity of heart and life to the image and example of Christ.

Who are the true followers of John, James and Peter? But those who acquire the power of a practical and living godliness, and exercise themselves to keep the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience; that is, in a conscience void of offence before God and man; and in this case, before these little ones who have believed in Him. "Salt is good: but if the salt have lost its saltiness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another." (vs. 50) Those "conformists" are not worth their "salt" who "conform" merely to the outward ceremonies of the Church, but think nothing of giving offence to these little ones by their careless and undisciplined living.

What is significant here, in the final analysis, I feel, is that Christ instructs John not to prevent the "non-conformist" Exorcist from going about and doing good in his Name; but to judge him according to his works of faith and his precision of his life according to the moral law. The exactness of his walking with God takes precedence over any kind of external conformity to John and the ceremonial law of the Church. Faith cometh not by the keeping of the Law, but the keeping of the Law by faith; for God hath commanded us all to repent of all our unbelief, and that whatsoever is not of faith is sin. Let the true followers of John look to their own hearts first, and examine their own faith; before they reject the "unknown" Exorcist for his "non-conformity."

[M.C. Steenberg]

So it rather does seem to be the case, as Matthew in a way predicted, that you offered the quotation not in fact hear what others think about it, but to provide an outlet for you to share what you think about it.

That is rather unfortunate.

INXC, Dcn Matthew

[Ken McRae]

Well, you are free to interpret events as you see them, but the fact of the matter is that I waited a fairly good amount of time for others to offer their thoughts. Where are they? It looked to me like the only way to get this thread moving was to offer my thoughts first; or let the thread die, which is most likely what would of happened without my post. If there had been more detailed feedback from the others, I may have just asked a few questions. But as you can see, that approach obviously went nowhere quick. I suppose it is useless for me to even say it was not my intention to cause suffering; so for Matthew's sake, and your own, I bid you all a fair adieu. I shall not contribute anything else in this forum, as it now seems like such a complete waste of time.

[Tim Grass]

It probably is a waste of time, when you use it to preach instead of have open discussions..... as you've done a lot before as "Theophilus".

Things are what we make of them.........

--tim

[Nicolaj]

Amen!

In Christ, Nicolaj

[Adrian Martin]

My patristic commentary (by Bl. Theophylact) explains the passage in quite a different way:


John, who was called the son of thunder, was not acting out of jealousy and spite when he forbade the man who was casting out demons, but John wanted all who called upon the name of Jesus to follow Jesus, and he wanted all the Lord's disciples to be one body. For at the beginning of the Lord's preaching, there were some who were ruled by the love of vainglory and wanted to work miracles themselves...They were permitted to work miracles because the Lord wished to spread abroad His preaching, even by means of those who were unworthy.

In Christ,
John

[Yuri Zharikov]

I will frankly admit that reading this passage I never knew how to interpret it for in a different place the Lord says "He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad." Also in the Acts we read about "certain of the vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them which had evil spirits the name of the LORD Jesus, saying, We adjure you by Jesus whom Paul preacheth." Now, the Jews exorcists were not with the Apostles, so in Ken's terminology they were nonconformists. So although their activity was somewhat useful - they helped some people and spread the name of the Lord - their own end as is well know was rather pathetic.

In the Lord,
Yura