T(r)oy's Marbles
cyrene's pioneers (1st part)
I'm back from a long hiatus. Be assured: I have been writing even though I have not been posting. Following is a piece I've been working on for some time now (I'd say about two months). It's an exploratory journey that I've divided up into several parts to make it more user-friendly.
At one point in writing this piece, I was tempted to post what I had at that stage, but decided against it. I renewed my commitment to finish it and then post it, so as to fill out a week-long journey.
I hope you enjoy it.
--Troy
Cyrene's Pioneers
There are many things that intrigue me about Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christ, but after my first viewing the part that stuck out the most to me was that of Simon of Cyrene. I could identify with this man and I admired his courage. Yes, it did take courage for Jesus to endure the scourging, the torture, the taunting and the humiliation. But Christ’s courage does not lessen Simon’s.
In Gibson’s portrayal of this shadowy gospel figure, I could identify with Simon’s reluctance to carry the cross. “What do I have to do with it, anyway?” he seemed to be saying. “I’m just a man passing through.” Then, the moment of decision came when he submitted to the pressure of the guards. From my perspective, at that moment it seemed like he was thinking: “I could likely be crucified as well by these tyrants once we reach the top of the hill.” To be sure, if Simon wasn’t thinking that, I was thinking it for him. This brought new life to a personage I knew little about, which in turn brought new life to the way I have viewed the scandal of Christ’s crucifixion.
So, while some Christians scoff at Gibson’s poetic license, I am grateful for the fresh look he has provided. For once, I appreciate being able to put a face and tangible action to a man who is only mentioned briefly in just one verse in each of the synoptic gospels.
I’m also thankful to Gibson for placing Simon downstage left-center because it has caused me to learn some fascinating (and pretty major) things about the development of Christianity in the first century. Knowing that the gospel writers selected carefully which details to include in their accounts of Christ’s life, I had always wondered why they seemed to include this strange one-sentence reference to a man who is never mentioned again in the entire New Testament. (And, how on earth did they know his name, anyway? And, why did this even matter to them at all?)
Of course, I’m here assuming that the gospel writers’ inclusion of Simon’s role is due to more than just “journalistic integrity” on their part. Such notions that mere “factual reporting” received the writer’s highest priority may be founded on a portion of truth (the writers did, indeed, esteem narrative fidelity), but, by and large, the gospel writers selected items for inclusion in their accounts because those items serve a larger spiritual purpose.
But, if the gospel writers were not merely journalistic in their approach, I must confess I succumb to that tendency from time to time while studying the Bible. On occasion I treat the gospel accounts as an ace reporter might treat a file of microfiche newspaper articles dating back to the 1950’s in search of ancient clues to a modern mystery. It’s only by God’s grace that I sometimes discover more than I bargained for: truth that affects not just my head, but also my heart. Such is the case in this instance, and (as I said) I’m grateful to Gibson for serving as a catalyst in the following soul-journey, even if I did embark on that journey for superficial reasons.
You may wonder what those reasons are. Read on.
How my exploratory journey got started
On Good Friday 2005, Jay and Carolyn Sensenig (good friends and team mates of ours) came over to our house to watch The Passion. “What better way to commemorate the significance of Good Friday?” we thought.
I must say, it was hard to keep Jay and Carolyn quiet during the viewing. They kept interjecting little comments and questions here and there throughout the film. (Of course, I would never do a thing like that, now would I?). When Simon of Cyrene appeared, the question they asked went along these lines: “Who is that guy, anyway?”
Understand: they weren’t asking, “What’s his name?” The question meant more than that. It had more to do with, “Who is he?” (Do you catch my meaning?)
I misunderstood the question, so I said: “That’s Simon of Cyrene.”
They said, “Yes, I know, but who is he? I thought Simon of Cyrene was African.”
“Uh—,” I muttered, “I dunno.”
With that, I determined to find out more about this man whom I knew little about. What I discovered lit my fire. A few nights later, I had to tell my wife (at a most inconvenient time for her) what I had learned (it was that big a deal to me). Read the next parts to find out “what I learned.”
teachings | Comments (0) | June 23, 2005