In English
history, Oliver Cromwell and leaders of the English Parliament in 1645 defeated the military forces of Charles I, King of
England. Charles I then was executed four years later. This execution shocked many of his followers. His son, Charles
II, then went into exile. Over their 12-year reign, Oliver Cromwell and his political party did much good, including the writing
of the Westminster Confession of Faith.
At the same time, there were
many excesses and bloodshed during that administration. Many of the English people
and particularly many Scots yearned for the ascension of Charles II to the English throne.
Then on May 25, 1660, Charles II
returned from exile, landing at Dover. Along the way, he was escorted in his triumphant journey
to London.
Winston Churchill, in his book, The History
of the English Speaking Peoples, he described the entry of Charles II into London, “They cheered and wept in uncontrollable emotion.
They felt themselves delivered from a nightmare. They
dreamed that they had now entered a golden age...”
Jesus’ entry into Jerusalem likewise was the entrance of
a new king. It was the entrance of King Jesus into the royal city. That story of his entrance is familiar to most of us. It is
so familiar that we can tell many parts of the story from memory – Jesus riding into Jerusalem on the back of a borrowed donkey
as the crowd waved palm branches and shouted, “Hosanna!” In his “triumphant entry,” Jesus boldly confronted
the religious authorities. He died on “Good Friday” on a Roman cross. It is a part of the central story of our faith. It
is important.
Even though the different
gospels were written over a number of years, and from a number of places, there are great similarities in each of the gospel
accounts of that entry into Jerusalem. At the same time, each of the gospel accounts was shaped by the particular purposes of the writers. For example, in Dr. Luke’s story of Jesus entering Jerusalem, there are some details that
are missing—details which are found in the other gospel accounts. Take
for example the waving of the Palm branches. In
Mark and in Matthew’s telling of the story (Mk 11:1-11;
Mt 21:1-11), “leafy branches” were
cut, and then laid on the road to cushion Jesus’ ride. Only in John’s
gospel (John 12:12-19) are palm branches explicitly mentioned. However, none were mentioned
in Luke’s gospel. Why did he not include them, when the other gospel writers
did include them?
To understand the reason
that Luke did not mention the disciples waving palm branches, we have to read the Apocryphal book of I Maccabees. In that book (I Maccabees 13:49-53), when the Jews defeated their oppressive foreign ruler, Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Empire,
they entered the Jerusalem temple waving palm branches. The waving of palm branches therefore had become a symbol of Jewish resistance against
any oppressive foreign government. The waving of palm branches was a “red flag” to the Roman government.
Dr. Luke further omitted
the crowd shouting “Hosanna,” a phrase meaning “Save us, now!”
Instead, Luke in agreement with the other gospel accounts simply included the familiar phrase, “Blessed is the
king who comes in the name of the Lord.” As with the waving of the palm
branches, Dr. Luke thought that the term “Hosanna” might appear too nationalistic in tone to his Roman readers. Moreover, remember that Luke was writing his gospel account to Theophilus, who was
perhaps an official in Caesar’s government.
In omitting these “red
flags” from his “triumphant entry” story, Dr. Luke was demonstrating for the infant Christian community
a survival strategy. He was teaching them how to witness faithfully to Christ
as Lord and Savior, while at the same time weaving their way through the ambiguities of Roman occupation. Luke did not bless
Rome
and its oppressive occupation. At the same time, Dr. Luke knew that in the “Second
Coming,” Christ would conquer all oppressive powers. In the meanwhile, the Christian community therefore did not need
to engage in open rebellion against an oppressive power that already was doomed.
Did you note who was in the
crowd that was welcoming Jesus that day? The
accepted ritual of welcoming of a king to a city was very important. Failing
to do so had led to one city’s destruction. Luke therefore was aware of
this traditional expectation. In chapter 9, Dr. Luke wrote (Luke 9:51-56) that when Jesus
had begun his journey to Jerusalem, his journey took him through a Samaritan village. In
expectation of spending some time there, Jesus had sent messengers ahead of him to prepare for his arrival.
Yet, when the people found
out that he had planned to go to Jerusalem, they refused to welcome him. Their refusal was due
to a religious disagreement that the Samaritans had with the Jews—it was over whether the Temple at Jerusalem or the Temple at Mount Gerizim was the leading sanctuary. In response to their refusal to welcome Jesus, his disciples asked him “Lord, do you want us to command
fire to come down from heaven and consume them?” In response, Jesus rebuked
his disciples for wanting to harm these people. Jesus and his disciples simply
went on to another village. Even though Jesus would not strike out at them over
their offence to him, a warm welcome was an expectation in that day.
Further, Dr. Luke wrote in
his gospel that “the whole multitude of the disciples” welcomed Jesus that day.
In contrast to the other three gospel accounts, Luke confined those persons welcoming Jesus to his disciples. It would be impossible to determine the size of this crowd of disciples. However, it seems that it may have been a smaller group than that indicated by the use of the generic term
in the other three gospels—“the many” or “the crowd.”
Further, absent in that welcoming delegation were the religious and civil officials.
Looking around, and sensing the absence of the religious and civil officials, some of the Pharisees therefore told
Jesus to silence his disciples.
Jesus had come to Jerusalem as the King. He had come in the name of the Lord. He had come to Jerusalem as God’s representative.
In his entry into Jerusalem, Jesus was making a dramatic appeal to the people—urging them to welcome him as the Lord of
their lives. Therefore, to the extent that the city had welcomed Jesus, it had welcomed God. To the extent that the city had
snubbed Jesus, it had snubbed God. In
the end, sadly only his disciples welcomed him to Jerusalem with open hearts.
To review here: In Luke’s
gospel, there was no waving of palms; no singing of Hosanna; no massive crowds reaching out to Jesus, and only his disciples
welcoming him to the city. Why then did Luke divert from the other gospel accounts
in omitting these details? Perhaps the answer to that question is to be found
in the story that follows it. It is the story of Jesus weeping over Jerusalem. Only in Luke’s gospel do we find these two stories connected. For
in their connection, we see the consequences of the religious and civil authorities’ rejection of Jesus.
As Jesus’ journey neared
the City of Jerusalem, he began to weep. Jesus wept over the city, he wept over their lost opportunity
to repent and believe. Further, in their rejection of Jesus and his means of
reconciliation, the city would engage in open rebellion against Roman rule. Due
to that rebellion, Roman armies would destroy the Temple and Jerusalem. When Jesus wept, he was weeping over what might have
been. Jesus wept over an opportunity that was being lost.
Halfway down the Mount of Olives there is a small chapel in the shape
of a teardrop. The chapel is called “Dominus Flevit,” meaning “the
Lord weeps.” It is located at the traditional location where Jesus
stood 2000 years ago and wept over the city. Pilgrims today gather there to celebrate
the Lord’s Supper. That chapel overlooks a city that still is divided by
different faiths squabbling over its real estate. It still stands in recognition of the great cost of reconciliation.
Two thousand years ago during
Holy Week, there were two processions into Jerusalem. From the west came Pontius Pilate manifesting the glory
of Roman power—war horses, chariots, troops carrying the latest weapons of war, and gleaming armor. He came there to control the crowd and to see that they obeyed the Roman way of doing things.
Then from the east, from
the direction where the promised Messiah was to come, there came another procession.
In that procession, Jesus was riding not on a warhorse but a humble donkey, a symbol of peace. He wore no gleaming armor, but instead he wore an ordinary peasant’s robe. He carried with him no weapons of war. As he rode toward the
city-- his disciples spread their cloaks on the road and sang, “Blessed is the King who comes in the name of the Lord!”
Rome’s kingdom and its powerful armies are long gone, buried in the dust of countless nations and
their military might. However, Jesus’ kingdom remains— continuing
to witness to him as Lord and Savior. Therefore, today on Palm Sunday, we Christians
join our voices with the voices of all the saints who are in heaven, singing, “Blessed is the King who comes in the
name of the Lord!”
