νεανίσκος
Probably
I should have stuck to automobiles instead of branching out into life
and theology and Bible stuff. It's the Bible stuff that catches me up
short, surprised, puzzled and ignorant. Linda says people get tired
of my reminding them I'm no scholar, but I'm so conscious of it
and selfconscious about it that it keeps popping out of my mouth
anyway. It pops up again as I read the gospel for the upcoming
Sunday –
46 They
(i.e., Jesus and his disciples) came to Jericho. --- As
he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho,
Bartimaeus son of Timaeus, a blind beggar, was sitting by the
roadside. 47 When
he heard that it was Jesus of Nazareth, he began to shout out and
say, “Jesus, Son of David, have mercy on me!” 48 Many
sternly ordered him to be quiet, but he cried out even more loudly,
“Son of David, have mercy on me!” 49 Jesus
stood still and said, “Call him here.” And they called the blind
man, saying to him, “Take heart; get up, he is calling you.”
50 So
throwing off his cloak, he sprang up and came to Jesus. 51 Then
Jesus said to him, “What do you want me to do for you?” The blind
man said to him, “My teacher,[g]
let me see again.” 52 Jesus
said to him, “Go; your faith has made you well.” Immediately he
regained his sight and followed him on the way. (Mark 10:46-52, NRSV)
Maybe
I shouldn't be, needn't be, but along with many real scholars over the
years, I've flinched at the apparent short shrift that Mark gives to
the visit to Jericho. He says “they came to Jericho,” and in the
next verse says, “as he and his disciples and a large crowd were
leaving Jericho.” Why, unless he is simply marking Jesus' route
from Galilee down to Jerusalem, does Mark even mention Jericho at all
if nothing happened there other than Jesus attracting a large crowd?
Well, in my Bible explorations I found an answer that appeals to me
and satisfies me. It's called the Secret Gospel of Mark, or Secret
Mark, or SGM. My Bible Seminar companions are probably sick and tired of hearing about it.
In
1958, at a monastery near Jerusalem, a scholar named Morton Smith
happened to come across a copy of part of a letter from Clement of
Alexandria to someone named Theodore. The letter, background and
translations available online, alludes to and quotes two parts of the
Gospel according to Mark that are not included in canonical Mark.
Some scholars say the excluded verses were in Mark's original gospel
and were edited out. I'm not developing the pros and cons of that
argument here. Clement describes exactly where the two omitted
sections go, both in Mark chapter ten as we have it – which makes
it easy for me to look at. Jesus is on his journey from Galilee to
Jerusalem, teaching his disciples as they go. SGM adds two things.
Between Mark 10:34 and 10:35 –
"And
they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died
was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says
to him, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked
her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden
where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the
tomb. And going near, Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of
the tomb. And straightaway, going in where the youth (νεανίσκος) was, he
stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the
youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he
might be with him. And going out of the tomb, they came into the
house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told
him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a
linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night,
for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence,
arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan."
So, there's an extra pericope, tradition, story. And
then at Mark 10:46 after “And they came to Jericho -- And
the sister of the youth whom Jesus loved and his mother and Salome
were there, and Jesus did not receive them.--
As
he and his disciples and a large crowd were leaving Jericho ...”
Okay,
this latter part of SGM accomplishes at least two practical things. It answers the
question of why Mark mentions Jericho. And it introduces Salome, who
otherwise appears, oddly and only in Mark, as some otherwise unknown
woman at Jesus' tomb (Mark 16:1).
Objections
to “restoring” SGM are obvious. It seems erotic, which we don't
like, but that's not a valid objection. It seems gnostic, later
declared unorthodox and heresy, which may be a valid objection and
reason for its being excluded from the canon, except that keeping secrets is
part of Mark's gospel anyway.
The
connection to Lazarus in John's gospel is obvious, as is a similarity
to the beloved disciple in John. I like the idea of including SGM in Mark. Though looking at a map of the Holy Land in the time of Jesus, I see a
geographical issue.
Jesus meets νεανίσκος, the unnamed young man, in Bethany. Then they go to Jericho. That makes no travel sense. So the meeting with νεανίσκος has to be in Bethany beyond Jordan, doesn't it, which is different from Bethany-at-Jerusalem in John's gospel where Jesus has supper with Lazarus. But I don't think the geographical issue bothers Mark, which he solves anyway, by saying that Jesus crosses over the Jordan and later crosses back, and also by having Jesus sup in Bethany-at-Jerusalem at the home of Simon the Leper instead of, as John's gospel, at the home of the beloved friend whom he raised from the dead.
Jesus meets νεανίσκος, the unnamed young man, in Bethany. Then they go to Jericho. That makes no travel sense. So the meeting with νεανίσκος has to be in Bethany beyond Jordan, doesn't it, which is different from Bethany-at-Jerusalem in John's gospel where Jesus has supper with Lazarus. But I don't think the geographical issue bothers Mark, which he solves anyway, by saying that Jesus crosses over the Jordan and later crosses back, and also by having Jesus sup in Bethany-at-Jerusalem at the home of Simon the Leper instead of, as John's gospel, at the home of the beloved friend whom he raised from the dead.
See,
this is the sort of rubbish that clutters my mind these days instead
of the differences between 1946 and 1947 Fords (location of the front
parking lights, and chrome strips on the trunk).
To
any extent the tradition on which it's based is as historical as it is kerygmatic, I think John's
Lazarus, and Mark's νεανίσκος, and the beloved disciple in
John's gospel are the same rich young man.
Thos+