Eleventh Sunday after Pentecost; 13 August 2023; Proper 14A (RCL); Genesis 37:1-4, 12-28; Psalm 105:1-6, 16-22, 45b; Romans 10:5-15; Matthew 14:22-33.
Someday, I’ll understand how the designers of the lectionary chose which parts of which passages to read. If we’re only going to read a snippet of Romans 10, why not verses 1-4? Those verses set up Paul’s main argument for the chapter. The bit that begins at verse 5 is just the supporting material for the main argument. How can we understand the supporting material if we don’t the argument? Paul is praying for his kin according to the flesh (that is the Jews, if that term isn’t anachronistic, or better, for Israel, according to the flesh). The crucial sentence (my translation) is “For, being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish their own (righteousness), they did not arrange themselves under God’s righteousness” (v. 3).
The NRSV translates the phrase “God’s righteousness” as “the righteousness that comes from God.” With N. T. Wright, I think the phrase instead means God’s own faithfulness to God’s own covenant with Israel; it speaks of a characteristic of God. In seeking to establish their own righteousness, Paul is implying that Israel according to the flesh wanted to establish a righteousness exclusive to themselves. And hence, they did not arrange themselves as part of the righteousness (seen as faithful membership in the covenant) that God has intended for all people. But God has been faithful to God’s own promises.
In the paragraph our lection begins with, Paul is interpreting Deuteronomy 30, which is Moses’ promise that God will bring the people back from Exile when they have turned their hearts toward God in the lands in to which they were exiled. The word is very near you. Paul sees this return from Exile alongside the Isaianic prophecies concerning the nations gathering in Jerusalem. This has happened in Jesus Christ. In Jesus Christ, God has been faithful to God’s own righteousness in gathering the new people, Israel, both according to the flesh and according to the Spirit, or as he said in chapter 4, all the heirs of Abraham’s faith.
There is now no distinction between Jew and Greek, but all who call on the name of the Lord (and here, Paul means Jesus Christ), and trust that God has raised him from the dead, will be saved, will be incorporated in to the new covenantally righteous community. This God will be faithful to do. And so now, the world mission must begin, bringing this news to all alike.
In light of this argument, I think I can make sense out of the story of Peter walking on the water. Matthew is the only Gospel to record the event. Both Mark and Matthew have two sets of sea-crossing/feeding miracles. In the first instance, Jesus is asleep in the back of the boat. Sandwiched between the first sea-crossing and feeding, Mark and Matthew include the healing of the Garasene demoniac, Jairus’ daughter, and the woman with the flow of blood. All of these are Israelites who, for various reasons, would not have been welcomed at a ceremonial banquet.
In the second set of sea-crossing/feeding miracles, Jesus is not in the boat, but comes walking across the sea, and the disciples think they are seeing a ghost. I argue that this implies a post-resurrection appearance, and between the second sea-crossing and second feeding, Jesus heals the Syro-phoenician woman’s daughter, after having insulted her (it is not right to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs). This suggests to me the post-resurrection struggle over the inclusion of the Gentiles in the eucharistic community (sea-crossing and feeding correlated nicely with baptism and eucharist, Red Sea and manna — a correlation Paul makes explicit in 1 Corinthians 10 and 11).
In Galatians 2, Paul describes a confrontation he had with Cephas (Peter) in Antioch, where Peter was eating with Gentiles, until certain men from James showed up, at which point he drew back. If the boat represents the church (present in very early iconography), the Jesus is inviting Peter to step out of the Jewish-only boat (Matthew’s Gospel is written with finding a way for Gentiles to live Torah in mind), and walk to him into uncharted territory. When he sees the storm of controversy, he loses nerve and sinks, just as Paul describes in Galatians.
When Jesus scolds Peter, he says, “you of little faith, why were you of two minds?” (doubt is not a good translation here). Matthew uses that word only one other time (for that matter, any writer in the NT). When the disciples encounter Jesus on the mountain in Galilee after his resurrection, they worshiped him, though some were of two minds. He then sends them to instruct the nations (Gentiles) and make disciples of them, baptizing them in the name of the Trinity. Two minds, baptism, gentiles, post-resurrection appearance all connected here. Not all Christians favored the inclusion of the Gentiles. Peter was of two minds.
God’s righteousness, God’s faithfulness to God’s own covenant, doesn’t depend on who we think should be included or excluded from that covenant. Jesus is out there in front of us walking into the storm of controversy and inviting us to follow.