Faith, desperation & compassion (Mark 1:40-45)

An unnamed person with some form of obvious skin disease, generally in those days simply called a “leper”, came up to Jesus, fell to his knees, and begged Jesus to heal him. This sufferer had seen and heard enough about Jesus to be totally convinced of his ability to cure those in such a situation as he was in. It was just a matter of whether Jesus would choose to or not. Jesus did choose to, and this man was cleansed from his “leprosy”. And this former “leper”, despite Jesus’ words to keep this quiet, could not hold back his public rejoicing.

Apart from the obvious faith that this man had gained, two other major factors led up to this man’s healing. The first was his level of desperation. This was no doubt due to the situation that people designated as “lepers” were placed in. They were excluded from family, community and religious life – forced to live in desolate places, on their own or together with people who had been likewise deemed “lepers”, often in degrading circumstances. They were generally feared and hated because of the supposed threat they posed. In those days [and right up into the 20^th century in the case of Hansen’s disease], conditions in the “leprosy” category were believed to be very contagious.

Such “lepers” lived in utter poverty, reliant upon charity for their survival. They had no medical support. Also, they were legally obliged to yell out “unclean, unclean” if any non-sufferers accidently were about to cross their path. This would be a life of physical, mental and emotional anguish. So, when this particular “leper” approached Jesus, he was taking the risk of doing so against the law. But “leprosy” was a calamity, and he just wanted to get his life back ... circumstances had conspired to destroy any chance for him to enjoy life or be creative or have the opportunities others took for granted.

The second factor in this leper’s healing was who Jesus was. Jesus was the God of compassion. Jesus saw this man’s condition, understood his situation, and was “moved with pity”. Jesus would be deemed ‘religiously unclean’ if he touched this man (thus setting Jesus up for more ‘pharisaic’ criticism), yet Jesus considered this irrelevant (in the face of such desperate need). Jesus could also have been viewed as ‘infected’ having touched this man. Yet Jesus, without hesitation it seems, reached out his hand and indeed touched him. [Jesus could no doubt have healed him from a distance, so by touching him was actually making a point regarding intimate contact with sufferers.]

To be even willing to touch him would be of great comfort and encouragement to this man – but because his assessment was right as to who Jesus was, he received complete healing as well. Of course he then went off on his own tangent (refer verse 45) – so you could argue that this man actually didn’t go on to become a follower (or disciple) of Jesus, because he didn’t understand what Jesus was most primarily about, and did exactly the opposite of what Jesus had counselled him to do.

Yet this possible outcome did not deter Jesus. He saw desperate need, and responded from deep within himself. Jesus was ‘gutted’, and his stomach turned by what he saw, and he could act in no other way. God’s will was for this man to be liberated from his physical and spiritual oppression. What a person like this man would do with this great gift subsequently – well that was now up to him. The physical liberation we see here leads toward a social liberation that has the potential to lead to a spiritual transformation as well.

There is another Greek word used in some of the old manuscripts that are used to translate this gospel passage into English. Where we have translated “pity” in verse 41, an alternative is “anger” ... “moved with anger”. At first these (“pity” and “anger”) might seem like opposites, yet when we consider the deep emotional place both of these feelings come from, we might recognise a connection. Jesus could have been “angry” at what life had come to be like for this man – a far cry from that original created ‘goodness’. What had happened that so badly disfigured a person physically and so deeply deprived them spiritually ... the disease itself, the social ostracism – the whole stigma of the thing! “Pity” or “anger” ... the result was the same – the beautiful touch of God’s healing.

So this is the example the gospel gives us in terms of the Jesus-like response to desperate need. Not all, probably not many, will be able to express faith themselves and come forward for help. Many innocents will suffer quietly; some under the power of abuse or addiction will feel demeaned and shamed by the situation they are in; some others will express very negative anti-social behaviour. Jesus-followers will seek to help them out, just because they too are ‘gutted’ by what they see. Yet on many occasions this will certainly test our faith to the core. In most cases it seems, our efforts won’t lead to immediate miraculous healing, but our genuine and personal touch will tend to bring ‘just what the doctor ordered’.

In the 19^th century, there was an large outbreak of “Hansen’s disease” (the worst of those conditions categorised under the general term leprosy) throughout the islands of Hawaii. Eventually the government decided to set up a leper colony on the island of Molokai, in a remote section where it was nearly impossible to escape. Sufferers were rounded up and transported by boat to Molokai (sometimes even dumped into the water a couple of hundred metres out from the shore).

“Hansen’s disease” took a shocking toll on the body and mind, and at this time had no cure nor effective treatment. Therefore, we would easily understand how such a “leper” colony would become a hopeless and degrading place. These poor people, given only the barest of necessities, had basically been left to their own devices to fend for themselves, with death being the only means of escape.

To this chaotic and degraded place came a Catholic priest from Belgium – Father Damien – in May 1873. Father Damien was not sent to Molokai, he courageously volunteered. Single-handedly, for some time, Damien fulfilled a variety of needed roles on this island – he comforted the hurting, he bandaged weeping sores, he nursed the dying, protected the weak; he built houses, churches, orphanages and hospitals; he buried the dead (hundreds and hundreds of them); Damien performed the role of both priest and community leader ... all the time desperately seeking more help to come from church and government. He grew vegetables, and sought to trade them for nails, timber and medicines that were sorely lacking. Damien on occasions also swam out to try to rescue those who were struggling to swim to the island having been sent over the side of the transport boat.

Father Damien went there for a stint of a few months, but finished up staying 16 years – dying there of Hansen’s disease related ailments at the age of 49. Ultimately Damien would become Saint Damien on October 11^th 2009 (ironically exactly the same day I was ordained by the Baptist Union of Victoria). This, like other awards he gained in his own lifetime, were worthy recognitions of Damien’s work. However, when it comes to picking up one’s cross and following Jesus, Damien said that, “The Lord decorated me with his own particular cross – leprosy”, a cross Damien had to bear in serving others, and also later in his own body.