Tag Archives: disciples

Third Sunday after Epiphany (January 21-27) in Year A (Mundahl)

Christian care for creation will address chemical spills. – Tom Mundahl reflects on mending torn nets, community, and creation.

Care for Creation Commentary on the Common Lectionary
(originally written by Tom Mundahl in 2014)

Readings for the Third Sunday after Epiphany, Year A (2014, 2017, 2020, 2023)

Isaiah 9:1-4
Psalm 27:1, 4-9
1 Corinthians 1:10-18
Matthew 4:12-23

It was not long ago that we heard the more extended Christmas version of Isaiah’s words, ā€œThe people who walked in darkness have seen a great light . . . .ā€ (Isaiah 9:2a). As we have moved through the season of Christmas and entered Epiphany, we have followed the journey of the one named Emmanuel back to Egypt, where, like Moses, he escapes the slaughter of innocent children. After his ā€œexodusā€ from Egypt and return to Palestine, we have marveled at his obedience in ā€œgoing through the watersā€ of baptism by John, a baptism which led him to forty days in the wilderness (reminding us of Moses’ 40 years of exile in Midian), where Jesus demonstrates the power of this obedience. Now, as he relocates in Capernaum, he prepares to unleash this light in teaching, proclamation, and healing. (Matthew 4:23)

The startling power of this eruption of light is best described in Jesus’ words, ā€œRepent—get a new mindset, change your ways—for the Empire of God is drawing nearā€ (Matthew 4:17, Warren Carter,Ā Matthew and the Margins, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis, 2000, p. 119). This new order begins to be actualized in the calling of the first group of disciples, recruits chosen not from among a privileged elite trained for leadership, but from the fishing trade. News of a new ā€˜order of things’ must have been welcome to these fishermen, who had struggled for years to pay heavy license fees to Roman minions simply to retain the privilege of putting themselves at the mercy of the elements as they sought to provide food for their neighbors (Carter, p. 121). Even though fisherman were accounted the very lowest status among free workers, they become the core of the community that will serve as an alternative to theĀ Pax Romana.

They are now called with the familiar words, ā€œFollow me, and I will make you fish for peopleā€ (Matthew 4:19). Likely, there are few phrases more misunderstood than ā€œfishing for people.ā€ While we automatically assume that the reference is to traditional evangelism, ā€œfishing for peopleā€ has a quite different biblical history, especially in prophetic literature.

Eighth century prophet, Amos, delivers words of warning to God’s people in Samaria because of their neglect of the poor and needy. ā€œThe time is surely coming upon you, when they shall take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooksā€ (Amos 4:2). Jeremiah writes to warn the people of Judah not to imagine that they will escape Babylon. ā€œI am now sending for many fishermen, says the LORD, and they shall catch them . . .ā€ (Jeremiah 16:16). Far from the ā€œsaving of souls,ā€ ā€œfishing for peopleā€ seems to carry the meaning of uncovering that which is concealed, just as fish seem to be concealed in the water until they are netted or hooked. This is surely one result of ā€œgreat light.ā€

All that has served to ā€˜cover up’ massive injustice in this Roman-Judean politico-economic system will be stripped bare. The corruption of the temple-based religious system will not be spared. As Ched Myers suggests: ā€œThe point here is that following Jesus requires not just the assent of the heart, but a fundamental re-ordering of socio-economic relationships. The first step in dismantling the dominant social order is to overturn the ā€œworldā€ of the disciple: in the kingdom the personal and the political are oneā€ (Mark, Maryknoll, NY: Orbis: 1988, p. 132). ā€œFishing for people,ā€ then, is using the light to uncover that which oppresses and to illuminate the possibilities from this new community for ā€œmendingā€ and ā€œhealingā€ (Matthew 4:21, 23).

It is as James and John are ā€œmendingā€ the fishing nets with their father that Jesus calls them. Not only was mending the nets a constant necessity for fisher folk; it is a powerful image for care of creation. Feminist theologian Letty M. Russell has consistently spoken of the need to uphold this biblical critical principle of the mending of ā€œGod’s world house.ā€ She relates: ā€œI first heard this simple expression of eschatological hope from Krister Stendahl, who said that theology is worrying about what God is worrying about when God gets up in the morning: the mending of creationā€ (Letty M. Russell,Ā Household of Freedom: Authority in Feminist Theology, Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1987, p. 71).

Recently, people in nine West Virginia counties, located on the banks of the Elk River, have been threatened by a highly-toxic chemical spill which has temporarily poisoned the local water supply. People of faith, called to be ā€œfishers,ā€ certainly have the responsibility to provide emergency help and temporary assistance to those affected.Ā Ā But, as the ā€œcrisisā€ and journalistic attention recedes, there is an even more important responsibility to shine the light of attention on the long-term impact of this situation. Why were there no inspections of the massive Freedom Industries facility from 1991 until 2010, when nearby residents complained about foul odors, which called attention to the plant? What are the long-term consequences of exposure to 4-methylcyclohexane methanol (MCHM) to humans andĀ all of God’s creatures?Ā That is, can ā€œfishā€ even live in this river? And why do we not use the ā€œprecautionary principleā€ which holds that a chemical must be proven safeĀ beforeĀ use, instead of relying on vague ā€œrisk assessmentā€ criteria? Finally, what other chemicals are stored by Freedom at that site? And what is the condition of storage tanks and the risks of spills?

It is only after the ā€œtearsā€ in the net of ā€œGod’s world houseā€ (Russell) are examined that they can be effectively mended. But when they are mended—and through the very process—the light of hope will shine to provide the vision to imagine new options in ā€œmaking a livingā€ in a way that mends and honors creation. Then the healing that is part of this new ā€œempire of peaceā€will be experienced.

But this process is not easy for any community. As we wrestle with Paul’s first letter to the new community in Corinth, we see how easily unity can be dissolved. Paul apparently writes before it is too late. As Conzelman suggests: ā€œThe split into groups has not yet led to the dissolution of the community; they still celebrate the Lord’s Supper together, and Paul can address the letter to the whole communityā€ ( Conzelman,Ā First Corinthians, Philadelphia: Fortress Hermeneia, 1975, p. 32).

That address follows the salutation (vv. 1-3) and the thanksgiving (vv. 4-9) with an appeal ā€œthat you be united in the same mind and the same purposeā€ (1 Corinthians 1:10 b). It may be surprising that the Greek verb ā€œbe unitedā€ is the very same word Matthew employed for ā€œmendingā€ nets, namely, katartizo. Clearly, there is mending needed in this community. Factions have developed around important leaders. Members look to those who have baptized them as special benefactors, a result that moves down the path toward schism. Even those who claim ā€œI belong to Christā€ (1 Corinthians 1:12) ā€œmust have been claiming Christ in an exclusivistic wayā€ (Richard B. Hays,Ā First Corinthians, Louisville: John Knox, 1997, p. 23).

Paul does not counsel faction members to stop bickering because it is inexpedient or looks bad; he points to the center of their faith, Jesus Christ, the bringer of new creation, as the common ground of unity. This source of unity will be tested further, because it is clear that Paul earlier failed to deal with problematic status distinctions and economic inequality, issues that reared their ugly head around the Lord’s Supper (cf. 1 Corinthians 11:17-34; Hays, p. 24).

One can imagine similar congregational conflict emerging over responses to the chemical spill in the Charleston, W. Va. area. Some may call for serious investigation of Freedom Industries and suggest a new economic basis for the area. Others in the congregation, fearful of losing jobs during a weak economic recovery, may insist that the church ā€œstick to religionā€ and not be involved in matters involving ā€œmending creation.ā€ Following Paul’s template is the only way to a unity that still may be difficult to achieve. But if church leaders have planned worship that encourages creation care and have modeled environmental stewardship in action, there may be the beginning of a consensus. But that consensus still must be based on what unites us at the deepest level. As the ā€œprologueā€ to the ELCA Social Statement, ā€œCaring for Creation: Vision, Hope, and Justiceā€ (1993), states it:

Christian concern for the environment is shaped by the Word of God spoken in creation, the Love of God hanging on a cross, the Breath of God daily renewing the face of the earth.

Tom Mundahl, St. Paul, MNĀ Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā  tmundahl@gmail.com