March 17, 2013
Lent 5
Philippians 3:4b-14
John 12:1-8
(prayer)
The Bible has three different versions of Jesus being anointed, handed down to us in four different Gospels.
Mark and Matthew share the same basic version. The setting is Bethany, just east of Jerusalem, in the home of someone called "Simon, the Leper". It is just a day or so before Jesus will be arrested. An un-named woman anoints Jesus' head with an expensive ointment. People in the room (Matthew says it was Jesus' disciples) complain that it was a waste to use the ointment; it should have been sold to raise money for the poor. Jesus responds by praising the woman and noting that she has done a memorable thing.
The Mark/Matthew anointing story is remarkably similar to what was read from John earlier in the service. Again John places the event in Bethany during Jesus' final days (John says it was six days before the Passover). John doesn't mention a Simon, the leper but locates the anointing in the home of Lazarus (a friend of Jesus) and names the woman as one of Lazarus' sisters: Mary. Also different from M&M is that it is Jesus' feet in John (not his head) that is anointed and she wipes his feet with her hair; also John says that the criticism comes from Judas alone, not the disciples as a group.
All of the authors of Matthew, Mark and John draw a parallel between the anointing of Jesus and the practice of anointing a body for burial.
And they all have the curious quote of Jesus, "you will always have the poor with you", which may be a reference to Deuteronomy 15:11 - Since there will never cease to be some in need on the earth, I therefore command you, ‘Open your hand to the poor and needy neighbour in your land.’
//
Luke is quite a bit different. First of all, the third gospel has the story much earlier in Jesus' ministry rather than during Holy Week. And because it is placed among other narratives that occur in Galilee, we can assume that Bethany (in Judea) is not the setting: certainly Luke makes no mention of the town. Like M&M, the woman is unnamed and the host's name is Simon (although, in Luke, Simon is a renowned Pharisee, not an avoided leper).
Like John, the woman's focus is Jesus' feet and she wipes them with her hair. And like all of the other three, the anointing in Luke raises concerns, but for an entirely different reason in this version. The cost of the ointment is not the issue - it is the moral character of the woman herself that raises eyebrows. "If Jesus was really a prophet, he'd know her reputation and would not let her touch him."
The other gospels presume that the woman was a welcomed guest, but in Luke this woman-sinner clearly crashes the party. This woman in Luke is overwhelmed in Jesus' presence; she cries... and her tears wash Jesus' feet before she anoints him. That is a powerful image that we must be grateful that Luke has shared with the church.
//
The what and where and who vary, but the core anointing story is strong and must hold a wonderful historical nugget of good news from Jesus’ lifetime.
The act is controversial: wasteful, distasteful and deeply intimate. And it is a light shedding moment – challenging the depth of care we owe each other. We are invited to ask: can we honour one without dishonouring others? What is the place of adoration in our lives of service?
//
[Aside: There is a prevailing theory among biblical scholars about the connection between the four gospels and the order in which they may have been written. Scholars were confronted with two opposite problems. Assuming that they were written by different authors, why do Matthew, Mark and Luke share so many of the same stories, often using almost exactly the same wording (that's why these three are called the Synoptic Gospels; and... why is John so different from the other three. I'll skip the details of the theories and jump straight to the widely-held conclusions.
Mark was the first gospel written, shortly after the year 70CE and became widely known within the early church. Matthew was written a few years later (mid-70s) and the author of Matthew had a copy of Mark to draw material from. Luke was written around the time of Matthew, and he (yeah, likely "he") also used Mark as a base. It is generally believed that Matthew and Luke did not know of each other's gospels, but since the do share common material (mostly sayings of Jesus) not found in Mark, the theory goes that they share an otherwise lost-to-history additional gospel that scholars have labeled "Q". There are other later examples of collections of sayings of Jesus. Q may even have simply been an oral gospel, committed to memory, not written down and that’s why no independent copies survived. Ask me later if you want to know why it's called Q. The Mark-Q (two-source) theory deals with the synoptic problem, but what about the johannine problem?
John is believed to be the last of the four gospels written and quite a but later, perhaps the 90s. John is certainly more theologically rich compared to the other three, which supports the notion that more time had passed before it was written. Scholars believe that John's author had access to each of Mark, Luke and Matthew and intentionally chose to relay the story of Jesus (the Christ) in a fresh way. He doesn't seem to want to simply rehash what was already know. For example, John's gospel makes no direct reference to the Last Supper, but bread and wine imagery is found throughout the gospel.
So... When we find the rare parallels to the synoptic gospels in John, it deserves special attention. We might ask: if we assume that John knew that the church was familiar with the story, why does he think it is important to share it again?]
Because John tells us about the anointing of Jesus in the context of the home of Martha and Mary, we might conclude that John is combining the anointing story with another brief story told only in Luke 10: "Mary sat at the Lord's feet and listened to what he was saying; Martha was busy with her many tasks." The Luke story goes on to have Martha complaining to Jesus that Mary isn't helping her. Jesus responds that Mary has chosen wisely. Reading between the lines, it seems that Jesus is saying that Mary's choice is symbolic of a spirit-focused life over a world-centered, distracted life.
Even though Luke presents Jesus in the home Mary and Martha completely separate from the anointing in the home of Simon, the Pharisee, there must be some method to John's madness of combining them. Of course, John did even more editing: although he kept the anointing at Jesus' feet like Luke, he used Mark/Matthew's reasoning for the complaints: the resource was too valuable to be wasted.
Now, I don't imagine there is much historicity in John's naming of Judas as the complainer (and the editorial comment that he stole from the group's common purse). I see that part of the story as a bit of literary foreshadowing by John of Judas' eventual betrayal of Jesus to the authorities. John is not one to hide the ending from his readers. After all the fourth gospel begins with a section that includes: In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God... And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father’s only son, full of grace and truth.
//
Because Jesus was such an obvious advocate for the poor throughout his ministry in his words and deeds, I imagine that several of Jesus' disciples (not just Judas) would have been puzzled by the apparent inconsistency in this instant. “Poetic License”, I’m sure John would say.
//
//
"You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me" does make Jesus sound a bit self-centered, even if he was intentionally referencing Deuteronomy.
//
One of the things I notice in all of the similar, non-Luke versions of the anointing of Jesus is that the expensive ointment seems to be property of the woman. No one else seemed to know that it existed until it was used, In fact, in John, it is said explicitly that the woman "bought" the ointment. That's interesting to me. When she brings it out, and the fragrant aroma wafts through the house, it seems to catch the others in the house by surprise. It's presence is unexpected. And then when people see her engaging in such an intimate act with Jesus (either over him caressing his head and running her fingers through his hair, or down low at his feet massaging, kissing, crying) it is shocking. It seems the disciples feel compelled to make some comment.
//
The basic truth of the story is that when she anoints Jesus, soothes his tired, smelly feet (or his bushy hair), she is sacrificing something of herself. Jesus notices that… and he won't discount what has already been done with a judgement of what might have been. As a general rule, after-the-fact judgements are seldom helpful: especially if they only chastise and don’t focus on future possibilities.
The woman’s personal, devoted sacrifice will be honoured - not at the expense of others, but in addition to other aspects of their shared ministry. Jesus used the opportunity to teach his disciples that devotion can accompany service.
//
//
The motto of this congregation is "welcoming in - reaching out". I see that as a phrase that parallels the dual priorities expressed in the anointing of Jesus: spiritual nurture and devotion and service in the name of that Spirit.
//
The truth is that both Jesus and Judas make good points in John chapter 12. And they do not need to be in perpetual opposition to each other, just because Judas would later panic and give Jesus up to the authorities.
Yes, Judas makes a good point: a live-out-compassion for others is essential for a person of faith. As Jesus, and the writer of Deuteronomy, so bluntly pointed out: as long as greed exists in the world, there will always be poverty. Faithful compassion, in turn, will always have opportunities to live out the commandment to "love your neighbour as yourself" (Lev19:18b).
And Jesus' point is well taken as well: what the woman did was an act of Holy Devotion. She chose to honour her lord and saviour with the best of what she could offer. Life (even a life of faith) should never be too busy to not include worship, praise, prayer, discernment. We must make opportunities to live out the commandment to "love God with all our heart, soul and strength" (Dt6:5).
//
It can be a challenge to hold these two aspects of faithful living in balance. It is natural to gravitate to one extreme or the other. When we do, the stretching of our spirit should call us back into balance.
The Letter of James proclaims that "faith without works is dead" (Jam2:17). I would add that works without faith... well, isn't faith at all. The Apostle Paul points to all of the accomplishments of his life prior to him becoming a follower of Jesus and now looks back and sees an emptiness that was filled with his deepened faith.
//
And so, there is value for our spirits to come together to offer praise and seek inspiration in worship.
And, the value is increased when the love and care and nurture we receive in times of devotion is translated into a lived-out-compassion in our homes and community and world beyond these walls.
//
//
Next week we will begin a challenging journey.
It will start with a humble and jubilant donkey ride that will become (in less than a week) a humiliating and laboured march up a hill called 'The Skull'.
It will take all the hope and promise our spirits can bear to rise on the following Sunday morn ready to met our God face-to-face. We will be invited to both:
· fall on our knees in prayer, and
· run out in the world with shouts of joy.
Spirit and Service will be the hallmarks of the renewed faith that will emerge.
Let us pray:
God of surprising grace, embolden us in ministries that convey care and compassion. Like Mary, like Martha, we minister to you. Amen.
#79MV "Spirit, Open My Heart"
No comments:
Post a Comment