THIS Gospel calls for reflection on giving and receiving criticism. But I almost missed the complete picture, which, in English, is obscured — apparently by an unavoidable mismatch between languages. Peter “rebukes” Jesus. Then Jesus “rebukes” Peter. The verb is the same. But it is also the verb that Jesus used when he “sternly ordered” (NRSV) the disciples to tell no one. Yet we cannot say in English, “Jesus rebuked them not to tell anyone about him.”
The AV, RSV, and NIV all follow the same path as the NRSV, choosing to vary the way they translate the one Greek verb. The old Douay-Rheims version (1582-1610), which is based on the Vulgate, goes to the extreme of using three different translations of it (“strictly charge . . . rebuke . . . threaten”).
Such variable takes on a single verb seem like reasonable concessions to the limitations of English. But there is a commonality in Mark’s use of epitiman across these verses. He could have used other words for the stern order in verse 30, and for the rebuking in verses 32-33.
To “warn” someone can be a positive thing: it offers guidance as well as criticism. But a “rebuke” is always a reprimand. That is one reason that I would probably have opted for “warn” in all three cases in this Gospel. But, if the NRSV and NIV had done so, would it make a difference to how we interpret the passage, changing our understanding of what Jesus says and does?
One way of clarifying the meaning is to ask whether Jesus was giving his hearers a free choice, or an unignorable command. The distinction between an “order” and a “warning” is not a trivial one. We need only to remember the Highway Code, with its circular signs for orders, and triangular ones for warnings. “Stop”, for example, is a more dogmatic sign than “Give Way”. Failure to observe this distinction can lead to catastrophe, even death.
If this were a study of the equivalent passage in Matthew’s Gospel (16.17-19), we might think that Peter was emboldened by Jesus’s praise, and by becoming the keeper of the keys to the Kingdom of heaven. But there is nothing of that in Mark. If we take the verb as an order, rather than a warning, then Peter is instructing Jesus, not making suggestions.
But, if Jesus is using this word to describe a “warning”, so, too, may Peter be. One reason that clarity eludes us is that we never find out what Peter actually said. He may have been condemning Jesus’s words outright; or proffering a mild piece of advice: “Please do not make your messianic message too downbeat.”
In the modern workplace, and in modern education, refusing to listen to alternative points of view is a sign of weakness, not strength. The closed mind is a mind that fears challenge. The open mind listens and learns. Workers expect appraisals. Pupils and students expect reports. At the end of every term, I must record whether students have been “Good”, “Satisfactory”, or “Unsatisfactory”, in terms of their industry, progress, and enthusiasm.
It is not mere quibbling to ask the question whether Peter is challenging Jesus’s authority or merely making a suggestion. I struggle to imagine Peter thinking that he had the right to correct Jesus about the nature of his message. I am still in touch with one of my former teachers, but I find it difficult even to call her by her Christian name, never mind imagine myself criticising the content or method of her teaching.
Our understanding of the gospel in all its fullness makes it inevitable that we stand with Jesus, trusting that his warning to Peter is not born of pride, or narcissistic sensitivity to criticism. It must spring from the completeness of his understanding of human motivations; his recognition (“Get behind me, Satan”) that a piece of apparent advice cloaks a dangerous temptation.
The passage enriches our understanding of Peter’s character, and of Jesus’s self-disclosure. If Jesus is “warning” his disciples to say nothing of his true identity, he is not forbidding, and certainly not “threatening” (as Douay and the Vulgate have it) but, rather, guiding them. At the very least, we may conclude, he is not issuing a command — although, as Messiah, he has the right and the power to do so. Our Jesus, time and again, is a velvet hand in an iron glove.