Curing Simon Peter’s mother-in-law.

Mark 1.29-31, Matthew 8.14-15, Luke 4.38-39.

The guy we know as St. Simon Peter is actually Simon bar Jonah of Capharnaum. Mt 16.17 Or Simon bar John; Jn 1.42 we don’t know which, ’cause one of the gospel-writers got it wrong, despite all the Christians who claim the bible has no errors. Fine; you tell me whether it’s Jonah or John, and don’t base it on which gospel’s your favorite, like the rest of Christendom has.

Jesus nicknamed him ܟܐܦܐ/Kefá, Aramaic for “rock,” at the beginning of John. Jn 1.42 I don’t know that Kefá was mean to be his proper name, because the New Testament regularly translates it into Greek, Πέτρος/Pétros, instead of transliterating it into Κηφᾶς/Kifás (KJV “Cephas”). Anyway Pétros became Petrus in Latin and Peter in English.

Simon was chosen by Jesus to be in his Twelve, as apostles who’d learn to do as he does, and proclaim his kingdom. Simon’s actually listed first in all the lists of the Twelve, Mk 3.16, Mt 10.2, Lk 6.14, Ac 1.13 and whenever we read of the Twelve doing stuff, we typically read of Simon leading the group. Ac 1.15, 2.14, 5.29 While Christ Jesus is the church’s leader, now and forever, Christians recognize Simon Peter as its first non-divine head; and Roman Catholics insist part of the reason the Bishop of Rome leads their church is because he’s Simon Peter’s successor to that job.

But unlike bishops in the Roman Catholic church today, Simon Peter was married. 1Co 9.5 The whole unmarried celibate leadership requirement they have today, drawn from Paul’s comments in 1 Corinthians 7.32-35, didn’t become their standard for a few more centuries. Evangelicals ignore it… though from what I’ve seen among certain church leaders who’ve no clue how to juggle ministry and family, maybe more of us oughta consider it. But I digress.

Though Christian art and movies regularly depict ’em as middle-aged white men, Jesus’s students were young brown men—teenagers, since Jewish adulthood was age 13 in that culture. Jews could even marry at that age, same as Jesus’s mom did; all the culture expected of them was they should be able to financially support a spouse, and Simon apparently could do that. (Probably cut down expenses a lot with how many people lived there!)

We don’t know Simon’s wife’s name. She mighta been mentioned in the New Testament, but we’ve no idea because none of the women in it are said to be Simon’s wife. Some Catholics claim his wife died before Jesus started training him, but Simon later implies he left her at home while following Jesus, Lk 18.29 and Paul straight-up states Simon had a believing wife. 1Co 9.5 Ancient Christian historian Eusebius Pamphili wrote Simon’s wife was later martyred the same day as he, Church History 3.30.2 and Clement of Alexandria wrote that Simon told his wife as she was led off to martyrdom, “Remember the Lord,” Stromata 7.11 which obviously means she knew the Lord.

Even met him in person. He cured her mother, after all.

That’s the story I’m analyzing today. In Mark and Luke it happens right after Jesus throws an unclean spirit out of synagogue, and in Matthew it’s right after the Sermon on the Mount—Jesus comes down from the mount, cures a leper, cures a centurion’s slave, then swings by Simon’s and cures his mother-in-law.

The order of events isn’t entirely important… except that in Mark and Luke, because this event takes place right after Jesus teaches in synagogue, it’d mean Jesus cured Simon’s mother-in-law the same day. (Even if it’s the very next morning, it’s still the same Jewish day, which is figured sundown-to-sundown.) Which’d mean Jesus cured her on Sabbath.

Though Christians still debate whether throwing out evil spirits is the same thing as curing the sick (and I would argue it absolutely is), this’d certainly be another instance of Jesus curing people on Sabbath—a practice which, as you’ll later see, profoundly irritated Pharisees because of the way they interpreted the Law. Obviously Jesus interprets it differently. I’ll get to that later. Meanwhile the controversy doesn’t come up yet, because Jesus didn’t cure the mother-in-law in public, so no Pharisees were around to bellyache about it.

To the story.

Mark 1.29-31 KWL

29 Next, coming out of synagogue,

Jesus and his students go to the house

of Simon Peter and Andrew with James and John.

30 Simon’s mother-in-law, feverish, is lying down.

Next, they tell Jesus about her.

31 Coming, Jesus wakes her up,

taking her hand,

and the fever leaves her.

She’s still serving them.

 

Matthew 8.14-15 KWL

14 Jesus, entering Simon Peter’s house,

sees Simon’s mother-in-law thrown down and feverish.

15 Jesus grasps her hand

and the fever leaves her and she is lifted up.

She’s still serving him.

 

Luke 4.38-39 KWL

38 Rising up from synagogue,

Jesus enters Simon Peter’s house.

Simon’s mother-in-law is afflicted by a great fever,

and the family asked Jesus about her.

39 Standing over the mother-in-law,

Jesus rebukes the fever, and it leaves her.

Instantly rising up,

she’s still serving them.

Mark describes this as “the house of Simon and Andrew”—not their father’s house, which means either their father wasn’t living and his house passed on to them, or they’d moved out and owned a home jointly. And because Mark adds “with James and John,” it may be that they owned the house jointly with the other brothers. Or they all just lived there. Four teenage or twentysomething guys living together; ordinarily I’d say yikes, but Simon also had his wife and mother-in-law there, so there was some semblance of civilization in the household. It wasn’t all drinking and gaming, and takeout boxes everywhere.

Anyway, coming home from synagogue they found Simon’s mother-in-law with a fever. Literally πυρέσσουσα/pyréssusa, “on fire,” in Mark and Matthew; συνεχομένη πυρετῷ μεγάλῳ/synehoméni pyretó megálo, “wrapped in a great fire” in Luke. Since Matthew describes her as βεβλημένην/vevliménin, “thrown down” by this fever, we can speculate she’d fallen, hurt herself or broke something, and this was an infection—but we can’t say that for certain. Only that she had a worryingly high temperature.

The gospels make it sound like the students didn’t know about the fever till they got home. But once they knew, they quickly brought the matter to Jesus, whom they knew could cure her—and he did.

Now I have heard it preached that Simon knew all about this illness; knew it before he’d gone to synagogue with Jesus. Yet did nothing about it… till he saw Jesus throw out that evil spirit, realized his Master could perform miracles, and figured he’d now try out Jesus on his mother-in-law. It’d make for a dramatic movie, but it’s inconsistent with the scriptures. Simon already knew Jesus could cure illness! Happened in Cana, remember? The royal’s son?

I’ve also heard it preached that Simon wrongly assumed Jesus wouldn’t cure on Sabbath… till the exorcism proved otherwise. Again, I don‘t buy it. Synagogue services began right after sundown Friday, right at the beginning of Sabbath. Which means if Simon knew his mother-in-law was ill before synagogue, he knew she was ill before Sabbath… and Jesus likewise coulda cured her before Sabbath.

Now here’s something more plausible: Simon knew his mother-in-law was ill, but at the time she was only a little ill, and he figured it’d clear up by morning. But once they got back from synagogue, she was way worse, so Jesus had to intervene, Sabbath or not.

Regardless of Pharisee beliefs about Sabbath, of course we can cure the sick on that day. “Don’t work on Sabbath” is the command, Ex 20.10 but Jesus taught good deeds are a valid exception. Mt 12.12 You feed your animals on Sabbath, Lk 13.15 and if they fall down a well, you pull ’em out. Lk 14.5 So why not cure the sick?

And there’s never a wrong time to ask Jesus for help. We can come to him at any time. Doesn’t matter if we’re in the middle of something, or we think he’s in the middle of something. He’s not unsympathetic. He’ll help.

Most of us understand this, so we don’t figure this is that profound a teaching. But we forget we’re to be like Jesus—which means there ought never be a wrong time for others to ask us for help. So if another Christian (or pagan; let’s not discriminate) needs aid, let’s never be too busy to help. The things on our schedule, like getting to work or meetings or church or lunch on time, should never be so important that we can’t help. People can’t always schedule emergencies. When they need it, we need to provide it. Jesus would. We should aspire to do no less.

Ministering to Jesus.

Hearing she needed help, Jesus went to her. Unlike the movies, unlike the “gentle Jesus, meek and mild” myths, Jesus didn’t gently touch her hand and say, “Arise,” and she slowly realized she was cured and slowly sat up. Jesus reached down, grabbed her hand, and pulled her out of bed.

Probably needed to. Maybe she didn’t believe she could be cured on Sabbath. Maybe she lacked faith in her son-in-law’s new rabbi. Regardless, Jesus didn’t bother to do much more than pull her out of bed, and she was cured.

The last thing the gospels note is Simon’s mother-in-law διηκόνει/di’ikónei, “is ministering,” to them. (Or, in Matthew, is ministering to Jesus.) Commentators like to imagine she, in gratitude, made ’em dinner or something. The NLT actually renders it, “She prepared a meal for them.” Mk 1.31 NLT

Massive problem with that idea: It’s Sabbath. You can’t work. Can’t light a fire, Ex 35.3 so can’t make ’em dinner. This whole no-work thing isn’t just a Pharisee custom we’re free to violate, same as their whole stigma against curing the sick on Sabbath. It’s one of the 10 commandments. Custom was that any food they ate on Sabbath had to have been prepared Friday before sundown—and if it wasn’t, they’d have to settle for whatever was in the pantry.

If Simon’s mother-in-law was irreligious (and no Pharisee), she could break Sabbath like crazy, and bake them a fish. But after personally experiencing the grace of God like that—getting cured of her deadly fever by one of the LORD’s rabbis—I can’t imagine her assuming she could willy-nilly break the LORD’s commands like that.

I should point out the word di’ikónei, “is ministering,” is an imperfect tense: It’s not a completed task. It’s something she’s continually doing. She didn’t minister, then stop. She is ministering. So the way I interpret this verb is she is ministering to Jesus and his students—from that point onward, to the day the authors of the gospels wrote their books. She became one of Jesus’s supporters, and still is.

Back then, rabbis got their financial support from their students and their families. In fact it was common practice for the students’ mothers to sorta adopt the rabbi, and take care of his needs as if he was a family member. Cook him meals, make him shirts, wash his laundry. And as a fringe benefit they got to listen to the rabbi teach. That is, if the rabbi permitted—and Jesus not only permitted this, but considered them his students too. Lk 10.39-42

Simon’s mother-in-law may very well have become one of the first of the women to follow Jesus. And you thought when he was gathering himself students, he only got four.