The Ambitious Request of SS. James and John

S. Mark x. 32–45

Our Lord had just before spoken the parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard. It must have been while He was still beyond Jordan, for such an illustration would be naturally 226 The Ambitions Request of ( cHAr. x suggested by the features of a Persean landscape. The note that they were going up to Jerusalem indicates that they had crossed the ford. It was an eventful epoch in their journey. The road to the scene of the Crucifixion was no longer interrupted, and thither “He “set His face steadfastly to go up.” Whether it was an impatient eagerness to reach the goal, such as He expressed in the outburst, “How am I straitened till it be accomplished!” or whether, in the anticipation of what awaited Him, He felt that He must gather strength from undisturbed communion with the Father, we cannot tell. All we know is, that, contrary to His general habit, He was walking 1 in advance of the rest by Himself alone. It was so unlike what they had been used to, that it led to anxious questionings among His followers.

They saw perhaps an intense earnestness in His look that bespoke grave forebodings, and their wonder grew into a weird feeling of awe, and “they were afraid.” And He, knowing their thoughts, called the Twelve, who would naturally be nearest in the crowd, and for the third time told them of His coming Death, only now with a greater distinctness, as befitted its nearer approach. He predicted even the mocking and spitting, the scourging and crucifixion, who would be the chief instigators, and who the agents by which it should be accomplished.

Strange as it may seem, what He told them of the coming shame and dishonour laid no hold upon their minds; they thought only of the glory that was to follow. Two of the favoured three came, and either with their own mouth, or through the intervention of their mother, preferred a request for the two prominent places of distinction in the kingdom which they supposed was about to be revealed.

There is no real discrepancy, such as has been alleged, between the narratives of S. Matthew and S. Mark. One puts the request into the mouth of the mother, the other into that of the sons. James and John had laid the plan, and Salome fell in with it. All no doubt were present, and it matters little by whom the petition was actually made. The answer, according to both narratives, was addressed to the sons, from whom it really emanated, directly or indirectly.

Jesus asked them if they were ready to share His lot, to drink the same cup of shame, and to be baptized in the same sea of affliction and blood. He Himself would not enter into glory till He had suffered pain, and those who would reign with Him hereafter must suffer with Him here. In the confident hope of strength to bear whatever might befall, inspired by His Presence, they assured Him that they could do what He asked.

He set His seal to their promise, seeing, it may be, their future history, when the one should lay down his life as the first martyr in the Apostolic company, and the other live on to advanced age in persecution, and cruelty, and exile, cheerfully borne for the Master’s sake. But they had misconceived how the honour which they sought was to be won. It was not as an arbitrary gift from His sovereign will, but to be assigned on recognised principles of labour and reward. It must be earned before it can be received. It is “not Mine to give, but it shall be given to them for whom it is prepared.”

This rendering of the Authorised Version is somewhat misleading, and seems to contradict what is elsewhere taught, that it will be the prerogative of Christ to award us our places in His future kingdom. The contradiction has been avoided by the Revised Translation: it “is not Mine to give, but 1 it is for them for whom it is prepared.” No doubt stress is laid upon the word “to give,” for, though it is in one sense a free gift of God, it is in another and most true sense wages for labour done. Men are predestined to receive it, but only after a life which fits them for the reception.

Now as soon as the design of the two disciples had become known, the rest were filled with indignation. It was not that they had any truer appreciation of the coming kingdom, for the old Jewish ideas were deeply rooted in them all; and the teaching of our Blessed Lord from the little child, whom He had set before them as a pattern of all that is opposed to selfseeking and pride of position, had left them unchanged. What kindled their anger was the discovery that James and John had been intriguing to forestall them, to steal, as it were, a march upon them, and insure by anticipation the posts of greatest honour.

When Jesus heard them wrangling, He called them all — the two as well as the ten, — and pointed out how grievously they had misconceived the nature of the kingdom He was about to set up. It was wholly unlike those earthly empires from which they had formed their ideas. In these, men in authority, whether sovereigns or princes, chiefs or subordinates, wield their power for their own ends. They too often tyrannise and lord it over their subjects, exercising the brief authority with which they are clothed in a total disregard of the interests and wellbeing of the people under them; but in the Messianic kingdom there will be no ambitious striving after power, no imperious exercise of supremacy, but all authority will rest upon the might of meekness and the sovereignty of service. “If,” He seems to say, “you need to be convinced, you have only to read the lessons of My life. Do you not recognise Me, have you not all along recognised Me, as your Head? And yet is it not true that from the beginning I have been ministering to others, exalted because I have humbled Myself, ruling because I serve? If you require still further proof, you have only to wait a while; for the principle will receive its very highest exemplification when I become obedient to the death of the Cross and give My 1 life a ransom for many.’”

One would have thought that such a sharp reproof could not fail to leave a lasting mark upon His hearers, but it needed even plainer teaching than this to eradicate views so deeply ingrained in their lives. The same strife broke out afresh at the close, in disputes for precedence * at the Table of the Last Supper; and He rebuked them again by a lesson of humility never equalled; and this time we would fain believe that the impression was never effaced. It was surely a picture not forgotten in after days, — that in which they had seen the Lord make Himself their slave, when He rose from supper, and laid aside His garments, and took a towel and girded Himself, and washed the disciples’ feet.

Note: fy irpoaywv avrovs. He was going before them, and “leading them to the conflict as an intrepid general leads his soldiers to the battle;” but it is used of a shepherd also before his sheep.

Note: The Cross had been mentioned before, ch. viii. 34, but only indirectly. Here it is spoken of as the instrument of His death.

Note: dXX’ oU 7)Toifx.a<TTcu. dXXa is regarded by some as equivalent here to eiyU77, which simplifies the construction, but the Revisionists have hesitated to accept this interpretation.

Note: Edersheim, vol. ii. x., has drawn this out very fully, and concludes that Judas claimed, and was allowed, the seat of honour next to our Lord.