Empathy
Bookworm on Mar 10 2008 at 7:57 am | Filed under: Religion
Yesterday my son’s chorus sang for a local Episcopalian church, so I attended the Sunday morning service. Because of the chorus, I’ve often attended services at this church, and I like the regular minister a great deal — he’s got a pleasant speaking voice and his sermons are witty, warm and, often, wise. Yesterday, however, he was unavailable, so another minister gave the sermon. Because the reading was John 11, which is the raising of Lazarus, the minister used that passage as the lesson.
Having heard the reading of Lazarus, I think the minister got her subsequent lesson dead wrong. Since I’m not Biblically very well versed, though, I’d like to offer you her interpretation, as well as mine, and see what you all have to say. Let me begin with the chapter, and I’ll highlight the language I thought was significant and that she missed:
1
Now a man was ill, Lazarus from Bethany, the village of Mary and her sister Martha.
2
Mary was the one who had anointed the Lord with perfumed oil and dried his feet with her hair; it was her brother Lazarus who was ill.
3
So the sisters sent word to him, saying, “Master, the one you love is ill.”
4
When Jesus heard this he said, “This illness is not to end in death, but is for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified through it.”
5
Now Jesus loved Martha and her sister and Lazarus.
6
So when he heard that he was ill, he remained for two days in the place where he was.
7
Then after this he said to his disciples, “Let us go back to Judea.”
8
The disciples said to him, “Rabbi, the Jews were just trying to stone you, and you want to go back there?”
9
Jesus answered, “Are there not twelve hours in a day? If one walks during the day, he does not stumble, because he sees the light of this world.
10
But if one walks at night, he stumbles, because the light is not in him.”
11
He said this, and then told them, “Our friend Lazarus is asleep, but I am going to awaken him.”
12
So the disciples said to him, “Master, if he is asleep, he will be saved.”
13
But Jesus was talking about his death, while they thought that he meant ordinary sleep.
14
So then Jesus said to them clearly, “Lazarus has died.
15
And I am glad for you that I was not there, that you may believe. Let us go to him.”
16
So Thomas, called Didymus, said to his fellow disciples, “Let us also go to die with him.”
17
When Jesus arrived, he found that Lazarus had already been in the tomb for four days.
18
Now Bethany was near Jerusalem, only about two miles away.
19
And many of the Jews had come to Martha and Mary to comfort them about their brother.
20
When Martha heard that Jesus was coming, she went to meet him; but Mary sat at home.
21
Martha said to Jesus, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.
22
(But) even now I know that whatever you ask of God, God will give you.”
23
Jesus said to her, “Your brother will rise.”
24
Martha said to him, “I know he will rise, in the resurrection on the last day.”
25
Jesus told her, “I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in me, even if he dies, will live,
26
and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?”
27
She said to him, “Yes, Lord. I have come to believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God, the one who is coming into the world.”
28
When she had said this, she went and called her sister Mary secretly, saying, “The teacher is here and is asking for you.”
29
As soon as she heard this, she rose quickly and went to him.
30
For Jesus had not yet come into the village, but was still where Martha had met him.
31
So when the Jews who were with her in the house comforting her saw Mary get up quickly and go out, they followed her, presuming that she was going to the tomb to weep there.
32
When Mary came to where Jesus was and saw him, she fell at his feet and said to him, “Lord, if you had been here, my brother would not have died.”
33
When Jesus saw her weeping and the Jews who had come with her weeping, he became perturbed and deeply troubled,
34
and said, “Where have you laid him?” They said to him, “Sir, come and see.”
35
And Jesus wept.
36
So the Jews said, “See how he loved him.”
37
But some of them said, “Could not the one who opened the eyes of the blind man have done something so that this man would not have died?”
38
So Jesus, perturbed again, came to the tomb. It was a cave, and a stone lay across it.
39
Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the dead man’s sister, said to him, “Lord, by now there will be a stench; he has been dead for four days.”
40
Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you believe you will see the glory of God?”
41
So they took away the stone. And Jesus raised his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you for hearing me.
42
I know that you always hear me; but because of the crowd here I have said this, that they may believe that you sent me.”
43
And when he had said this, he cried out in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!”
44
The dead man came out, tied hand and foot with burial bands, and his face was wrapped in a cloth. So Jesus said to them, “Untie him and let him go.”
45
Now many of the Jews who had come to Mary and seen what he had done began to believe in him.
The minister focused entirely on two portions of the above passage: first, the part describing Lazarus as Jesus’ friend and, second, the passage in which Jesus wept. From these two points, she excerpted this lesson: Jesus was incredibly sad that his friend died, so sad that he cried. This should be considered un-Godlike — Gods do not weep, quoting from the Life of Pi
Here’s how I understood the story of the raising of Lazarus, and I’d like you please to tell me where I, a non-Christian, am erring: As of this point, Jesus’ closest followers, such as Martha and Mary, believed in him absolutely. Others, however, were either merely impressed by him or didn’t believe at all. After all, his previous miracles could just have been the Biblical equivalent of party tricks. Because his message was so important, Jesus needed a convincing manifestation of his divinity in order to snap people into awareness. This is why Jesus, when he heard about Lazarus’ illness said, “This illness is not to end in death, but is for the glory of God, that the Son of God may be glorified through it,” and why he delayed two fateful days before heading out, and why he confidently stated that “Lazarus has died. And I am glad for you that I was not there, that you may believe. Let us go to him,” and, lastly, why he could assure a weeping Mary that “Your brother will rise.”
In other words, as I read the passage, Jesus knew with absolute assurance that he would see Lazarus again on this earth — and very soon too. This means that, when he wept, he could not have been weeping for his own loss and pain. And if that’s the case, the minister was completely wrong to read into this story a mini-version of the Passion, with Jesus’ suffering over the loss of his friend being the equivalent of his willingness to take on the pain of human kind. To me, that interpretation is close, but no cigar.
To my mind, the question is, if Jesus was not suffering over Lazarus’ death — knowing as he did that this death was merely a transitory matter that Jesus himself would reverse — why then was he weeping? As I see it, Jesus was weeping, not over his own grief, but over the grief of those he loved. He wept because Mary wept. Jesus is demonstrating pure empathy, a feeling that, is I believe, one of the hallmarks of the healthy human condition. Sociopaths and psychopaths are incapable of either true sympathy or empathy. Narcissists and others with mere personality disorders may experience sympathy, but they too are incapable of empathy. Only a fully realized human being can see another’s grief and feel it deep within himself as if it is his own. That, to me, is why Jesus weeps. He may be a divinity, capable of raising the dead, but he is also a man, who is deeply moved by the grief of others.
In other words, I understand this story to be more than just a preview of Jesus’ fundamental powers over life and death. It is also a lesson about humanity and our connection to others.
Critiques? Criticisms? Comments? Concerns? I’m very anxious to hear from you all because, frankly, I betting that your insight and understanding are stronger than this well-intentioned minister’s.
Related posts:
Email This Post To A Friend
26 Responses to “Empathy”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I agree with your theological interpretation, Book. I also agree with some other comments concerning how Jesus was either invested with divine power or a mad man.
Your interpretation seems to follow from the text. The minister, though he meant well, does not seem to have given this as much thought as he might have.
I’m speaking as an agnostic who has never attended church, so I’m looking at this issue only from the text. I agree – if Jesus knew that Lazarus would be returned to life, his weeping would be for those who grieved. He might also have sorrowed, knowing that in a way he would benefit from their grief – something that was necessary and in the end good, but which we as human beings sorrow about all the same.
You’ve made an assumption on a question to which I have never heard a definitive answer… When did Jesus become divine? From what I have read and been told there are a number of different thoughts on that, though I think you can break it down to the “At birth” and “At death” camps.
You might take a different lesson from the reading if you operate from the assumption that Jesus’ divinity did not come until his resurrection. Of course some would question the whole idea of “his” miracles then comes into question.
This minister certainly cherry picked his verses to make his lesson point, something that is far from uncommon.
I heard an excellent sermon yesterday on this lesson, which it appears went a bit deeper than the one you heard, Bookworm. The minister tied it in with the reading from Ezekiel about the Valley of Dry Bones. It was a long sermon and I am still working through it all, but here’s the gist of it–at my current level of understanding, anyway:
The minister dwelt, very profoundly, I thought, on the grisly reality of death, which Jesus himself was preparing to confront, knowing his ministry was about to end in his execution. She thought it significant that Lazarus was in an unpleasant state of decomposition by the time Jesus got there. In the face of the grief and horror of death–our own or a loved one’s–the texts remind us, like Ezekiel, that the Lord will make these bones rise and walk again. But it is one thing to have hope when the sun is shining and things are going pretty well, another when you find yourself surrounded by that field of bones.
Your point about Jesus weeping from empathy with his friends and from his own grief for Lazarus is of course in there also; these stories have many layers of meaning.
I always enjoy your blog and your insights.
Elizabeth
Bingo, Book…you got it! So did my own Episcopalian minister and the rest of our congregation last Sunday. The important part of the reading is exactly what you highlighted:
“Jesus told her, “I am the resurrection and the life; whoever believes in me, even if he dies, will live, and everyone who lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?”
However, I wonder (based upon your account) if the minister in question had his own doubts about Jesus’ divinity and therefore focused on His perceived human weakness (being sad and crying).
Unfortunately, the Episcopal church today is full of Leftwing apostate priests (one reason: unlike in Roman Catholicism, the Anglican priesthood can pay very well, comes with great benefits AND you can marry, so it’s a magnet for social workers looking for good-paying jobs). A leader of this movement is the notorious and highly published Episcopal bishop John Spong. This is one reason why the Episcopal/Anglican Church is in such turmoil, here and abroad.
Oceanguy: the beginning verses of the Gospel of John address the cosmic “when” of Jesus receiving his divinity. I believe the incarnate Jesus is said to have received his divinity at his baptism, when the Lord said, “This is my son, in whom I am well pleased.”
Thank you. By the way, elc, I also heard the dry bones passage from Ezekiel, which I hadn’t read since college, and which impressed me a great deal. The minister completely ignored it in her sermon, so she really didn’t address the intersection of death and resurrection — despite the fact that the cyclical clearly placed it before her. Danny’s point about well-intentioned social worker’s heading for Episcopalianism seems just about right regarding this minister. I don’t doubt that she is faithful in her faith, but she’s not a deep thinker, and I really noticed the regular priest’s absence.
On another point, I fully appreciate the irony of the fact that, due to the chorus, I go to church a whole heck of a lot more than I ever attend Jewish religious rituals. While no one should get their hopes up about my converting, I still find these intersections with religion interesting and thought-provoking.
At least, Book, I get the distinct impression that you understand “us” Christians a lot better than most, including nominal Christians. Perhaps your Mission from God is to serve as a bridge to share that understanding with Jew and Gentile alike.
elc, on the point of the divinity of Jesus, I think the underlying theme is that Jesus never claimed he was God. All fo those claims came after his death. The Gospel of John, written at least 50 years after Jesus’ death, and not from an eye witness… is not a source I’d pick.
“Baptism” too is a topic of interest. Since the mikveh (ritual bath) predates Jesus, and as a Jew Jesus might have had to use one… how did one dip in the mikveh serve as a baptism and others didn’t? Honest question, I’m not a new Testament scholar, though I’m fairly well read on the matter.
One thing about much of Christian teaching today that I think gets it entirely wrong, is that they ignore the Jewishness of Jesus. He was a Jew and, in today’s parlance, an observant one. Without understanding his Jewish life in context one misses much of the story. It becomes a simple tale. I’ve heard it asked, if Jesus were to reappear today, would he go to a church or a Synagogue?
What a nice thing to say, Danny. Although raising children to be good citizens is certainly a purpose in life, and a valuable one at that, it doesn’t utilize all my brain cells, and I often feel as if I’m just paddling pointlessly through my days. If my mission is indeed what you say, or if I at least intersect with that larger mission occasionally, I’d feel quite honored.
On another point, I fully appreciate the irony of the fact that, due to the chorus, I go to church a whole heck of a lot more than I ever attend Jewish religious rituals. While no one should get their hopes up about my converting, I still find these intersections with religion interesting and thought-provoking.
You are a victim of Martin Luther, Book. Luther split from the Catholic Church because he believed religion could be made more accessible to the people through hymns, folk songs, and music sung by choirs.
Uh, trust me, Oceanguy. For the most part, we Christians do a pretty good job of “getting” Jesus pretty well, His divinity and Jewishness and all, even if we don’t always agree on the details. Thanks for the insight, though.
Oceanguy, you stated that nowhere had you heard a “definitive answer” to the question as to when Jesus became divine. Those are the definitive scriptural answers. It now appears that you meant the sort of answer that would require Jesus’s dated, notarized birth certificate or some other such historical/scientific “proof” of divinity conferred. Afraid I can’t help you there. There is both a “vertical” spiritual aspect and a “horizontal” material aspect to these matters. [Bob Godwin's blog onecosmos.blogspot.com further defines these concepts, and IMO has terrific insights, no matter what your religious tradition.]
Jesus’s miracles are seen as an ongoing *demonstration* that he was God–assuming, of course, that you are coming at them from the vertical.
As I understand it, the mikveh or ritual bath is used for cleansing following childbirth, preparing a dead body for burial, or any time there is a need or wish for purification. “Living water” will also work; in other words, water that is not still and stagnant. John the Baptist was so called because he provided this service. It was not the baptism in the living water of the Jordan River per se that conferred the divinity on Jesus, it was the appearance of the dove descending and the voice of God.
Which, of course, is the “vertical” explanation.
I should have said “conferred upon, or revealed” the divinity of Jesus.
Agree, Danny Lemieux. I might add that most of us are quite familiar with–and interested in– Jesus’s Jewish birth, upbringing, faith, and practice.
Hmm. Dunno about your ministerial experiences, but I think I’d stay far away from the Lazarus narrative when trying to explain anything about Chrisitanity. Lazarus just gets you into trouble, particularly since the missing pieces of Mark were found in 1958, and it becomes very clear that Lazarus says entirely too plainly: ‘IGNORE THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!’
Lazarus pretty much essentially tells you that there was indeed both a curtain, and a man behind it.
Best to steer clear, if you’re in the minister biz.
What the heck is jj talking about?
Anyways, Bookworm, it is a combination of two aspects. Empathy, of course, is one. But weeping over a person’s death is a usual response, I daresay. I don’t know about you, but during Lent Christians are supposed to reflect on the fact that Jesus died for our sins (as well as for the whole world, of course). Notwithstanding the fact that we know He is risen and alive, you know, we still weep that He had to die.
Maybe Jesus had those same emotions.
JJ is suggesting, if I have his position correct, that Lazarus and Jesus put up the Resurrection as a trick.
On the Divinity of Jesus… until the time of Constantine, belief in the divinity of Jesus was far from universal. The Council of Nicaea, while officially Romanizing the church, essentially passed by a referendum that Jesus was divine. But that vote has hardly settled the debate.
Even today there is debate among theologians about when he became divine. elc, since you take the position that divinity was revealed at baptism, I take it that you are in the “received at birth” camp… immaculately conceived and God from birth. You’re certainly not unique nor alone, but there are others who believe otherwise and prefer to stress the humanity of Jesus during his life.
My point to Book was simply that the lesson of Lazarus might change a bit with differing perspectives on the humanity/divinity of Jesus. With very little effort one can find all sorts of material on the discussion of the humanity and divinity of Jesus. No I am not looking for any definitive answer… theologians much smarter than I haven’t found it and I don’t expect an answer in this thread. But I am surprised at the less than cordial tone, and I’m surprised at the vehemence of your assertion. Please take that as a compliment on the depth of your faith.
On the miracles… I made my point poorly. I have heard some argue that Jesus’ miracles are proof of his divinity. I would counter with the thought that Moses was certainly on a par with Jesus in the miracle performance category. In other words Jesus did not have to be divine to raise Lazarus. I’m afraid I’m unfamiliar with “God-assuming,” and don’t know if it affirms or hedges on the “miracles as proof of divinity” point.
I do not mean the discussion as an affront, I only meant to bring the debate to this thread. Let’s just say I was surprised at the assumption/assertion there is no debate among Christians on the how and when of Jesus’ divinity.
And that belief in Jesus’ divinity, Oceanguy, is what defines one as a Christian by faith. To Jews, Jesus was a rabble-rousing rabbi. To Muslims, Jesus was a prophet. To other religions, he is known as a wise man, a philosopher.
To Christians, Jesus was the Messiah who “by the power of the Holy Spirit became incarnate from the Virgin Mary and was made Man”. This is a matter of faith, not library research. Faith is a tough nut to define – explaining faith to those that have none is a bit like explaining colors to the color-blind. It appears to be and is totally illogical. How do I know? Been there, done that.
Danny, my only point/question is the timingof Jesus’ divinity. I have, for the purposes fo the discussion, absolutely acknowledged the matter is an act of faith. But I also recognize that the faith has evolved over the centuries. In mentioning the Council of Nicaea my point was that divinity DID become a matter of faith 400 years after the resurrection… until then it was debated. Once Constantine through the Council decreed the divinity of Jesus, the debate then shifted to the timing and method of his becoming divine.
I find the history of that debate fascinating and hoped a discussion would ensue here. Evidently I was mistaken. I shall bow out with no further comment that may unintentionally offend.
There’s no offense in asking questions, Oceanguy. I wasn’t offended.
My dear oceanguy;
That is as may be; nevertheless, it should not be. Paul clearly states, well before the Council you speak of, paraphrased;
“though in very nature God, did not consider equality with the Father something to be grasped, but instead emptied Himself and took the form of a man Therefore God raised Him up…”
Hence, Jesus is both God and Man, and was so from the beginning of time.
“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God… and the Word tabernacled among us.”
God does not possess people. He does not confer divine status on anybody. There is only one God.
“Shema Israel, El*h*m adonai, El*h*m echod”
Logically, therefore, ah well, you know.
Dear Ymaskar;
Thank you for letting me know what jj might have been suggesting. I suggest instead that jj was quite possibly drunk, stoned or otherwise not in his right mind when he posted that. Imagine two Jewish men outwitting the crowds, authorities, the Romans, His own disciples… quite a feat.
gkong3, among the many things I’d never accuse jj of being are drunk, stoned, or otherwise not in his right mind. He is a witty, erudite, sophisticated writer, with a charming touch of the curmudgeon and, I suspect, he occasionally likes to tweak people’s chains. Out of his rightr mind? Never!
Dear Bookworm;
Really? OK. He sure sounded like it, though.
jj, if you were wanting to yank someone’s chain, congratulations! you managed to yank mine. Quite a professional job, I must say. (btw, why is it never just *one* congratulation?)
I freely admit that I still don’t get what he was driving at, though. Was it Lazarus who faked death? Was it Jesus? Or both? I mean, if the very bones of the prophet Elisha could raise the dead, well, anything’s possible, right? I will further admit his wit, erudition and sophistication whizzed right past my head in that post.
Well, I certainly didn’t mean for this post to create any ruffled feathers. For me, it was just a matter of figuring out what message one could best discern from the Lazarus story, not about Christ’s divinity, but about Christ’s humanity. I thought the minister got it all wrong when she tried to have us feel that Christ was crying for himself. I still think that the core message in that passage for humans, not divines, is that empathy is an important aspect of the human condition.
Indeed, just today I talked to my son about that, because one of his teacher’s has a funeral to attend — her friend’s child died. My son was pretty sure that the teacher didn’t know the dead child. It was something of a revelation to him that his teacher could feel her friend’s grief as if it were her own. Children have some natural empathy, but a lot of it needs to be developed, or at least recognized. And, as I said, I think empathy is one of the things that distinguishes fully realized human beings from damaged ones.
Dear Bookworm;
Nah, no ruffled feathers, I don’t think. Can’t speak for others, of course.
Empathy is what separates us from animals, full stop. The ability to feel as others do – no, the ability to know that others *feel* and *think* and *act* – and to factor that into our decisions, that is what makes us human, I believe.
I do suspect that Yehoshuah (You don’t need to call him the Anointed One if you don’t believe He is, after all, I don’t insist on it
) cried not only out of empathy, but also out of grief. Christ is undeniably human; he ate, slept, got tired, got angry – grieving, I believe, is also a human thing, although some animals appear capable of it.