Mercy at the Cross? Nothing seemed to change on earth the day Jesus was crucified. Or did it? For whom?

 Mercy at the Cross? Nothing seemed to change on earth the day Jesus was crucified. Or did it? For whom?

I am referring of course to the crucifixion of Jesus from Nazareth by the occupying Romans  in Jerusalem around CE 30. I have been studying the Gospel of Mark for a couple of months and some of what follows really became apparent to me today.

For the twelve men who had spent the greater part of the previous three years with Jesus it seemed that the proverbial “bottom had fallen out of their world.” What happened that day certainly did not seem to have any redeeming qualities as far as they could see - at the time. For one of them, Judas, unfortunately, the bottom did fall out of his world. He had betrayed Jesus to the authorities who had been crowding around all week hoping to catch a moment when they could arrest Jesus. If you are familiar with the story, you know he had a change of heart when he saw what happened to his former Master and when he saw no way out, committed suicide.

It was really no different for the women who had also been traveling with Jesus and, according to the records, supporting him financially and otherwise from their means. They appear to have been braver than their male counterparts of whom we hear nothing once the process that culminated in the crucifixion began, except for John, who often seems to identify himself as “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” Perhaps that expressed his sense of deeper personal devotion to Jesus than he perhaps saw in his peers. It might also have reflected the apparent fact that he outlived his eleven friends and might have been the only one not to die a martyr’s death. In any case, he was at the cross, as witness the report that Jesus saw him and asked him to take care of his mother, Mary. 

Otherwise, there certainly did not seem to be anything of mercy in what happened that day. At least not for Jesus’ followers. However, there were two other men crucified with Jesus. Now, the normal Roman custom was to leave their victims hanging until they died of a cumulation of dehydration, fatigue, pain, lung congestion and heart failure. That could apparently involve 2-3 days of unimaginable suffering. However, this crucifixion event happened during a day on which the holiest of Jewish Sabbaths began at 6 PM, that of their most important and longest running ‘feast’, Passover. 

Now, the Romans weren’t generally inclined to make accommodations for the people they conquered. But perhaps because the Jews were such endless trouble, forever rebelling, they had granted them that no bodies would remain on crosses over the Sabbath day. So, in keeping with that, if those being crucified had not died in time to take their bodies down by the beginning of Sabbath, they had a way to hasten their death. 

One of the reasons victims could live so long was that they could push themselves up against the spikes driven through their ankles and feet, the better to inhale, to breathe. It would have been too humane for the cruel Romans, or maybe not quick enough, to simply remove the spikes from the ankles and let the bodies hang, in which case suffocation would have happened soon enough. They had a method that added more pain and suffering for as long as the victims remained alive to experience it. They broke their legs! The same goal was accomplished but far less pleasantly. 

The soldiers ere probably happy to be performing these crucifixions on this day. It meant they got to go home sooner. The record states that Jesus died around 3 PM. That was about the time when the soldiers decided to hasten their charges’ demise. They broke the legs of the other two men first and when they came to Jesus, they realized he already seemed to be dead. He was spared one more indignity. A little mercy?

When you think about it, the circumstances just described actually also meant a little mercy in a way for the other two victims. They got to die that day instead of having their dying dragged out over days. One of them, as we also know from the story, got a lot more mercy than that. In fact, he was the first to really experience the mercy that Jesus’ death actualized, but which was not realized by anyone else until he came back to life and had to teach his disciples all about the cosmic and eternal significance of what had just happened. 

At first both criminals taunted Jesus, just like most of the others watching or even passing by. However, one, knowing Jesus was innocent and evidently coming to believe that there must be something to these accusations of his being the Messiah that were being hurled at Jesus, eventually felt moved to call out to him, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” Perhaps he knew more of Jesus’ good life and that it had led to many really wanting him to be their Messiah, the promised one who would set all things right for them and restore their kingdom. Jesus, knowing what was in the man’s heart, saw what he needed to see and promised the man, “Most assuredly, today you will be with me in paradise.” There is no greater mercy than that. 

Was there not also mercy for Jesus’ mother and his beloved John? Whether Jesus was the eldest or only child of Mary’s, either way he was, as a son, responsible for her future into old age. He discharged that duty on the cross by asking John to take over for him. Mercy for Mary! And perhaps John’s long life was also a mercy. Mercy at the cross indeed!

Leadership and Abuse

Lately, a couple of stories have again troubled at least the part of the Christian Church I am more connected with - the Anabaptist/Mennonite and Be in Christ (BIC, formerly Brethren in Christ) churches. One story was about the popular leader, preacher and writer Bruxey Cavey resigning from office in the BIC denomination in the Toronto area because of allegations of sexual abuses, followed by his being charged by Hamilton police with sexual assault. This was followed by the removal of his books from print and sales by Mennonite media, who at the same time did the same with the writings of the already deceased but influential Anabaptist thinker and writer John Howard Yoder. This was because of sexual abuse scandals surrounding him. If I need to add more, the reputation of another well-known and respected radio preacher and writer Frank Epp was also posthumously recently tainted with the spectre of his having sexually abused.

These are stories the Church, the community of the faithful, struggles mightily with. It grieves us to see this happen. The responses have not always been encouraging either. Organizations, such as denominations and centres of education tend to regroup around their own for damage control. As is so often the case in so many spheres, the victims lack support and a voice, a hearing. 

This is not new. The Bible contains stories of such behaviour. Even so-called heroes of the Bible such as King David fell prey to sexual misbehaviour. Incidentally, it does not appear that the Psalms ceased being printed, ceased being distributed. Then, just today, a file came across my screen documenting five stories of sexual abuse by clergy among our Mennonite forefathers in Russia.

Sexual misbehaviour by anyone is wrong. Perpetrated by church leaders makes it even more egregious. They are to be our shepherds, our teachers, helping guard our souls, not wreaking havoc with them. 

Understandably, unless it occurs in one’s own congregation or school, or one you are close to, one doesn’t her about it. Often, one only becomes aware of such when the offender is prominent enough for it to make a media splash. One could almost be forgiven for believing it doesn’t happen at lower levels. I wonder if it might not be the case that it happens less at lower levels.

We have had cases in fast-growing and mega churches. These churches are often begun and led by gifted and dynamic individuals who become powerful heads of  large organizations. As such, they are prey to overwork and the stress that comes with that. This can cloud judgment. The hard work and positions reached can sometimes lead to entitlement. The structures are sometimes such that the individual at the top becomes somewhat isolated from others and thus less accountable. These leaders are then placed on such pedestals that leaves them no room to err. All of this creates gaps through which these leaders can fall mightily is something like them being caught in sexual abuse happens.

Are these reasons to go back to small, local churches? There, where everyone knows everyone else, or at least quite a few know quite a few others, the leaders are not so distant as to be unapproachable. They are also likely to be under much closer scrutiny.

But what is our role in all of this - us as members of churches, fellow staff of schools? How much do we pray for our leaders not to fall into these temptations?

Just some of my response to these recent stories. What think ye?