Take nothing for the journey: Sunday Readings 15 B (Y-not question the Sunday Readings)

Tony, I too have been wondering about this question you raise,

Beyond the image, what is the point of going out with minimal clothing and no provisions, not even a few coins to buy a meal? For the Greeks it was a way of showing that one could live free of excess baggage. The Hebrew prophets seem to have used it as a way of drawing attention to the radical demands of God's justice. For the apostles of Jesus, I think, it would have been primarily a test of their metanoia: a time for them to discover whether or not they had taken on a new way of seeing, whether or not they believed in the power of the spirit which Jesus endowed them with. Just as they are totally dependent for life on what is given to them, so for the fruit of their mission they are totally dependent on the spirit to give life to others.

I began with looking at my own experience of a year with very little, then began thinking about this theme of setting out without possessions as it appears in other religions.  I've tried to keep it brief, because the Internet is there for anyone to follow up for themselves the wonderful world of other religions' spiritual practices.  
                                                 .......................
Once upon a time, when we were a young family we moved often between construction jobs. One assignment took us to Bougaineville for a year.  We could take nothing but a suitcase of clothes each.  The rest went into a container that was supposed to follow, but in the end was left in storage as there would have been no room for anything more in the tiny house we were assigned.   We were given a survival kit of ill-matched crockery, cutlery, saucepans, towels and bedding.  Other families were in the same situation.

In that year we learned to live with very few possessions.  No telephone, no television, no shops, apart from a supermarket for basic food, and certainly, in our tiny house, no room to put anything else anyway. In that year we learned what a blessing it was to possess so little.  Such a sense of freedom!

So when I read of Jesus' instructions to his disciples to take so little with them for the journey, this seems to be not a sacrifice, but rather a glad abandoning of possessions that would otherwise clutter up their lives and restrict their freedom to move around.  Nevertheless, so little to be taken...?  

To be penniless travellers would have had the consequence of giving no alternative but to go out and meet people and to inspire them with a different vision of how to live life more fully.  Words valued so much that people would want to offer them a bed, want them to stay longer and impart more about the Kingdom of God

 I am reminded of hearing about Buddhist monasteries having to be established near towns because as the monks are not permitted to buy or prepare food for themselves they must go out early every morning on an alms round with one of their few possessions, a food bowl.  Householders happily give portions of food to a passing monk - unless they are displeased with him, in which case they simply turn the proffered bowl upside down.  Back at the monastery with an empty bowl, the monk has to explain to the abbot the reason for his empty bowl!

In Hinduism, when life's duties as a householder have been completed, and grandchildren have begun arriving, a man is permitted, even encouraged, to hand over his house and business to his eldest son, and retire to the forest, with or without his wife, to lead a simple life of meditation, seeking spiritual wisdom.  Then may come a final stage  when even that lifestyle is abandoned.  Reaching his seventies, he may become a sannyasi.  He puts on saffron robes, takes a staff and a begging bowl and begins a wandering life.

As for the Bauls of Bangladesh, these wandering mystics coming from both the Hindu and Muslim Sufi traditions, they too own nothing but their saffron robes and an ektara, a simple one stringed musical instrument.  They wander often in groups, singing of love and friendship, with longing for the one who dwells within and in all.  And whenever they arrive in a village, there is a party!

This is a rather simplified version of what happens in these other traditions, and of course there are many variations, but the essential theme is the same: the move, in the second half of life, to renunciation and homelessness.  The ultimate goal is spiritual wisdom, expressed in such terms as union with God, liberation from suffering, enlightenment.

In the Gospel reading, Jesus iseems to be sending the disciples into that final phase, a life of renunciation and homelessness, but they're also given the task of encouraging others to embark on that search for spiritual wisdom.  Repentance is not so much about sin, remorse and the resolve to try to live a better life, but rather, as metanoia, about a change in focus, a shifting of the gaze towards towards God and the beginning of a search for wisdom.

But what meaning can all this have for us, modern Westerners, who for the most part will live out our lives as householders, rather than retreating to forests or becoming renunciates?

I think it means that in the second half of life we do set out on our own search for spiritual wisdom, and part of that process is giving ourselves time for reflection and study, perhaps doing the occasional retreat, or seeking spiritual guidance when someone's teaching attracts us.

But what of that final renunciation?  Not everyone would come to that unless their search has been particularly intense and focused.  My feeling about that final renunciation is that it is not about a change of lifestyle, it is not about leaving home and family.  It is purely an inner matter.

The final renunciation is the walking away from all religious beliefs, from all images and concepts of God, from all desire for spiritual experience, even from that person regarded as spiritual guide or guru.  It is the entry into the cloud of unknowing, where the inner self stands naked, spiritually impoverished, before the mystery.  What happens there is beyond words, only hinted at by Jesus, when he says,

"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of Heaven"

And afterwards? What comes to mind is the final picture and verse of Zen's Oxherding Pictures, where the one who has abandoned all, returns to the marketplace with 'bliss-bestowing hands', which fits so well with the idea of the disciples driving out demons and anointing the sick with oil and curing them.  

Sue

Thank you Tony and Sue for such thoughtful reflections.
As usual I will go off at a random tangent again.......

“Take nothing for the journey”
• This suggests that the apostles would have a single-minded focus on their real mission with great zeal, conviction, courage and trust – a focus on the people they were going to meet, on personal relationships, on communion.
• Their mission was to spread the good news and seek justice for the downtrodden. How can they do that most effectively? – It seems to suggest that by having no props and paraphernalia they were only able to teach by example, by great conviction, by total integrity in their missionary tasks, by action.
• Our own role as Christ’s followers need to be characterised by those same factors – great focus, conviction, integrity and role modelling. Our lives have to be Christ centred, other centred.
• The video clip of Eugene Stockton talking about the light and warmth of the campfire spreading out in concentric circles to the people according to how close and receptive they are to ‘the light’ seems apt here.

Tony, your last paragraph contained the phrase “empty echoes in empty temples.“
Somehow that paragraph reminded me of a story of simplicity and integrity.
It is about Mahatma Gandhi.
A troubled mother had a daughter who was addicted to sugar.
One day she approached Gandhi, explaining the problem and asking if he would talk to the young girl.
Gandhi replied, “Bring your daughter to me in three weeks’ time and I will speak to her.”
After three weeks, the mother brought her daughter to Gandhi.
He took the young girl aside and spoke to her about the harmful effects of eating sweets excessively and urged her to abandon her bad habit.
The mother thanked Gandhi for this advice and then asked him, “But why didn’t you speak to her three weeks ago?”
Gandhi replied, “Because three weeks ago, I was still addicted to sweets.”

Ghandi wasn’t prepared to give advice that he himself could or would not follow.
As a leader he was determined to have the integrity and credibility that grows from acting and doing what he himself was advising others to do.

For us it always seems to come back to the same message.
It’s not about what we say. It’s about what we actually do.

It is said that there was a poster on a wall in Kolkata that inspired Mother Theresa.
It also seems relevant to the message of this Gospel.

Thanks Tony,Sue Brian and Jerome

When I first started to chew over this Gopsel I was struck by the sharp contrast between this passage and the photographs from the episcopal ordination of the new Bishop of Toowoomba

" Take nothing for the journey except a staff ... "- the Spanish Scripture scholar Jose Antonio Pagola in a reflection on this Gospel comments " The staff .. is not a symbol of authority but a reminder to keep journeying ". This seems so different from the highly ornate silver croziier depicted in the photos.The latter seems very much a symbol of episcopal power.

Pagola also comments that Jesus is giving the disciples authority over unclean spirits - he is NOT giving them power over people ,power to impose themselves on others.

However it is easy to critique the hierarchy.

How many of of us ( particularly in the second half of life ) would be able to travel as light as what Jesus is demanding of his disciples ?

Most of us are probably burdened with far too much excess baggage -
our habits (addictions ?) ,power,influence, security,pet likes and dislikes,cultural influences etc.

Rather than trying to put ourselves in the place of the disciples maybe part of the challenge is to accept that we are the ones that are in need of healing ,need to have some "unclean spirits " driven out.

Maitland

What an amazingly rich and diverse response to this week's Gospel! There's so much to ponder on in this thread, drawn not just from Christianity but from other faith traditions and from personal experience. At first I wondered if I could add anything of value, but I feel a great need to join in this discussion and I suppose there's always something more to be said about a Gospel passage, so I'll give it a try!

It's interesting that Maitland mentions the Spanish Scripture scholar Jose Pagola, because I am just reading a wonderful (IMHO) book by him entitled, Jesus: an historical approxiamtion. In considering this passage, Pagola even makes mention of the verse that has always worried me a bit, where Jesus tells his disciples that if a village refuses to accept them, then as they leave, they should shake the dust of the village off their shoes as "a testimony against them". Couldn't this been seen as justifying the way Christian groups have, throughout the ages, persecuted those who have not accepted the "truth" as they see it? However, Pagola warns against taking this saying too seriously: maybe, he suggests, Jesus intended it as a "humouros gesture", as a way of saying, "so much for you!" Well, why not? I also wonder if Jesus intended it simply as a way of making the novice evangelisers feel a bit better about themselves when they had their first experiences of rejection. While many Gospel passages may contain messages for our lives in general, I think it is always important to examine each verse in its context if we are to be sure of its meaning.

This brings me to the topic which has been much discussed in this thread, the matter of taking little on the journey. I particularly loved Sue's description of the way this ideal has been been expressed in various faith traditions. Much of it would be a bit too radical for me to want to try in my own life though! This kind of broader reflection is of course a legitimate response to the Gospel, but for me the most meaningful thing to do, as I said, is to try to tease out the understanding we can get from the context of a verse or passage. Pagola points out that, although the Twelve took nothing with them, they were not meant to beg: if Jesus had intended this, they would have been allowed to take a bag. Instead, they are dependant on the hospitality of those that they inspire with their new vision. I particularly love the way Pagola emphasizes that this acceptance of hospitality goes beyond the obvious pratical purposes:

This is not a simple strategy for the sustenance of the mission. It is a way to build a new community in the villages[...]Here, everyone shares what they have: some, their experience with God's reign and their ability to heal; others, their table and their house. The disciples' role is not only "giving" but "receiving" the hospitality they are offered (p. 287)

So, the evangelisers come among the people as equals: they are neither superior beings who have deigned to share their knowledge of God with lesser mortals, nor are they beggars dependant on the goodwill, or otherwise, of those they try to convert. This of course resonates with what Tony says, about the need to be willing to expose something of ourselves, to be willing to touch one another and to receive as well as give.

I was also pleased that Pagola emphasises something that I have long believed: you cannot separate Jesus' preaching from his healing and his casting out of demons. Jesus was enabling those who had previously been unable to participate in community life, due to illness or "uncleanness", to once again be part of the community. He is also not just telling people, but showing them, that the reign of God has truly come among them. In this context, the important point to focus on is not whether Jesus literally healed diseases or cast out devils etc, but the effect that this had on people. That is, he didn't try to convince people in words that he had come to bring good news, although their experience might tell them otherwise; instead, he convinced them of it in a natural, human way, a way that couldn't do otherwise than fill them with joy and hope, and with an ability to love just as they had experienced his love.

This was the gift which Jesus' apostles were also empowered to give to those who were willing to listen to them. It's not surprising that those who experienced this gift were only too willing to open their homes to their benefactors. I believe that hospitality was a sacred responsibilty in the ancient world anyway, but Jesus' hope was that it would be willingly and spontaneously offered, not just out of a sense of duty. This, it seems to me, is the essence of Christianity as Jesus intended it: a genuine and spontaneous love among a community of equals. Will it ever be possible in the real world? I live in hope.

Cathy Taggart

I splash in my poetry puddle
and try to keep God amused. - James Broughton