Seventh Sunday after Pentecost; 24 July 2022; Proper 12C (RCL); Hosea 1:2-10; Psalm 85; Colossians 2:6-18; Luke 11:1-13.
The metaphor of the relation between husband and wife for the relationship between God and Israel, while seemingly tender, is problematic. In the honor/shame context of ancient Israel, a wife’s adultery brought shame on her husband’s family, and so he was justified in methods of controlling her sexuality that we would find problematic at the least.
In addition, in this equation, God’s faithfulness is characterized as male, while Israel’s sinfulness is characterized as female, an equation which has unfortunately perdured in insidious ways. All that said, however, as the book of Hosea evolved from its original context at the end of the Northern Kingdom, to its use by the deuteronomistic historians in Exile, we can hold on to the idea of God’s reconciliation to a wanton people. God remains faithful to God’s covenant despite the waywardness of the covenant people (in which role we can see ourselves, if we look carefully enough). God remains faithful to the covenant regardless of the shame the people’s behavior brings on God.
The passage we read in Luke gives us an early form of what came to be known as “The Lord’s Prayer.” Luke’s version is missing several elements contained in Matthew’s version — “Your will be done on earth as in heaven”, “rescue us from the evil one” — these are missing in Luke. Both include a petition that God’s kingdom come, and for daily bread (the word we translate as “daily” is problematic in Greek — it is a neologism, and we can’t really be sure what it means, something like, “the bread we happen upon,” or “abundant”?). Both petition for the forgiveness of sin or debt, just as we have forgiven those who owe us.
But the real difference is Luke’s little parables about how prayer works. In the first parable, there is an egregious mistranslation. The word the NRSV translates as “persistence,” should really be “shamelessness.” Even though his friend won’t get up and give him what he asks for because he is his friend, nevertheless, because of his shamelessness, he will give him what he asks for.
The man whose friend has come to him in the middle of the night is already deeply shamed because he has nothing to set before him. He’s got nothing to lose by standing outside his friend’s door and knocking all night. He can’t be any more deeply shamed. And if his friend doesn’t get up and give him what he needs, the whole village will be shamed for its failure of hospitality.
More than once in the Old Testament, some intercessor (Abraham,Moses, Joshua, and others) remind God of the shame that will attach to God if God fails to act. What will the nations say if you don’t save your people? We’re not used to thinking of prayer in this way — we’re far too polite.
I think the context for the Lord’s Prayer was its original use by the wandering prophets of Christianity. Jesus sent out the disciples two-by-two, and we have evidence of such wandering Christian prophets early on. They would pull into a village, gather the people for a stone-soup type meal (eat what is put before you), raise the dead, heal the sick, and proclaim the kingdom. The meal, along with something like the Sermon on the Mount would serve as a covenant-renewal ceremony for the residents of the village. They would encourage the elimination of debt among the villagers, and the restoration of covenant relationships. A prayer like the one we have here would have served the purpose of a covenant renewal ceremony very well.
God’s kingdom had come near, sufficient food existed in the stone-soup meal, forgiveness of debt would restore symmetry within local relationships and restore all to God’s good graces. All that was left was to pray to avoid oppression by the other Empire on the scene. Here is the Gospel summed up a few short lines.
So, the purpose of Luke’s little story would be to remind the villagers that they were all in the honor/shame game together. To forgive one another their debts they would have to admit them. Only in this way could all be brought again to share in the honor of the whole. Imagine the effect this would have on those who had been held in shame by the rest of the village. No wonder they could speak of casting out demons and raising the dead. Here is Hosea’s God restoring the shameful, unfaithful people to the marriage covenant. The dead are raised indeed.