3rd Sunday after Pentecost [Pr.6] June 13, 2010 “Series C”
Grace be unto you and peace, from God our Father and from our Lord, Jesus Christ. Amen.
Let us pray: Forgive us, gracious Lord, for the ways in which we ignore those whom you love and for whom you died. Forgive us for the ways we tend to see our friends and family first, without looking beyond our circle to those caught in your wide embrace of redeeming grace. Forgive us for the way that we walk past those who are in need because their need might intrude on our placid lives and make difficult demands upon us. For your transforming, healing grace, we can but give you thanks. Amen.
In one of the commentaries that I read on our Gospel lesson for this morning, it stated, “Rarely, in human life, are boundaries drawn more clearly than around the dinner table… The table is a place of intimacy, for the sharing of food together is one of the most intimate of human activities. The meal, eaten by the gathered family at the end of the day, is a sort of sacrament of family life, an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual bonding.” End quote.
Now, although I would not disagree with this comment, I do wander if it might not be a bit passe. Over thirty-five years ago, Dr. Delton Glebe, the former dean of Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, lamented the breakdown of the daily family meal. He told our class that the family today is so involved in so many activities, that it is lucky to share a family meal together on a weekly basis, let alone daily. He concluded that the loss of this daily ritual puts a strain on family intimacy.
Clearly, the mobility of today’s society contributes to even less frequent family sharing around the table. For example, Josie and I rarely have the opportunity to break bread together with my daughter, son-in-law and two grandsons, who are now living in Tokyo. Even though they remain in our daily prayers, the intervals between table fellowship is far too long.
But for the Jewish people, especially in Biblical times, meals were seen as religious occasions. In fact, the custom of saying a blessing before eating a meal was a Jewish tradition to claim the dinner table as a place of Divine grace and revelation. To gather around the table was a time for sharing and growing together in faith.
Our Gospel lesson for this morning puts us at the dinner table with Jesus. Jesus is the guest of a man of relatively high social and religious status. He is a Pharisee named Simon, and as a Pharisee, Simon spent much of his day studying God’s word and striving to live his life according to his faith.
All goes well, until an unnamed woman from the city, who is described as having been a sinner, upon learning that Jesus was there, barges into the scene completely uninvited. Though her sin is not mentioned, her actions have intimate overtones, as she goes to great length to bathe and anoint Jesus’ feet, using her tears, her hair, and perfume. The depiction of such extravagant touching of Jesus by a sinful woman would have made any first century Pharisee extremely uncomfortable.
However, Simon, this religious purist, does not respond to the woman’s actions. Instead, he views the situation, and concludes that Jesus could not possibly be a prophet, a spokesperson for God. Even though Simon had invited Jesus into his home as an honored guest, he now takes a negative stance toward Jesus, saying to himself, “If Jesus really were a prophet, he would have known that the woman who was touching him so intimately, was a sinner.” In other words, according to the religious custom of that day, her actions would defile Jesus.
At this point, Luke employs a bit of irony to his story. Even though Simon had only expressed his opinions to himself, Jesus responds to Simon, indicating that Jesus does indeed have prophetic powers of insight. Jesus knows what Simon is thinking, and so he says out loud, so that the whole company at the table can hear, “Simon, I have something to say to you.”
Then Jesus asks Simon one of those questions that forces him to come up with the right answer. “There was a creditor who had two debtors. One owed him 50 days’ wages, the other owed him 500 days’ wages. The creditor was a generous person, and when he found out that the debtors couldn’t repay him, he forgave both of them their debt. Which of the debtors will love him more?”
Simon answered, “I suppose the one whose greater debt was canceled.”
“You’re right!” said Jesus. And then Jesus drove home his point. “Simon, even though you invited me to share in the intimacy of your table, you didn’t offer me even the basic obligations of hospitality. You didn’t greet me with a kiss, or offer water for me to clean my feet, or oil to anoint my head. But Simon, do you see this woman, how she welcomes and honors me.”
So what are we to gain from this story. First, Dr. Richard P. Carlson, Professor of Biblical Studies at Gettysburg Seminary, makes a very interesting point in his commentary on this text. Dr. Carlson states, “There is an important point of the original Greek grammar in verse 48, that is not evident in our English translations. Jesus says to the woman, ‘Your sins have been forgiven.’ The verb here is in the perfect tense, indicating that forgiveness previously has been bestowed upon her.
Here, the woman continues to live in the reality of divine forgiveness by recognizing from whom divine forgiveness comes, and responds with extravagant devotion. This is what faith and salvation entail. As the concluding verses of our text states, among those accompanying Jesus in his ministry are many women who had experienced healing and who continuously offer service to him from their own resources. To have experienced the redeeming grace of God begets devotion and service.” End quote.
This opens up the possibility that Jesus may well have previously known this woman from the city, and her sinful past. But as a person who had experienced the redeeming grace of God, the woman could not contain her desire to lavishly express her gratitude to Jesus for the grace she had already received. I believe that this understanding of the text, is congruent with the question that Jesus posed to Simon. The one who has been forgiven the greater debt, has the most to be thankful for. The clear implication is that this woman did not express her concern and love for Jesus in order to earn her forgiveness. It was her response to the forgiveness already received.
This simple change in verb tense of the original language of the text, makes a profound difference in our understanding of the story. As William H Willimon states in his commentary, “The implication is that the host, the self-righteous religious person, doesn’t really see this woman. He looks and sees someone with a label, someone who has been pigeonholed as a “sinner.” That’s all he sees. But when Jesus looks at this woman, he sees a “daughter of Abraham.” She is also a member of the family. She also has a claim upon the goodness and mercy of God. He sees her differently than others see her.” End quote.
As a result of this change in verb tense, there is nothing in this text that would indicate that Jesus did not know of the sins the woman from the city had committed. Nor is there any indication in this text that would indicate that Jesus ignored the validity of the woman’s sin, or downplayed the significance of sin as a deterrent to an intimate relationship with God. But Jesus saw and loved the person first, in spite of their sinfulness.
This is a lesson from which we might all learn. It is a lesson that asks us to consider how we perceive ourselves as we come to be nourished at our Lord’s table. It asks us to consider how open we are to expanding the boundaries of our love and compassion to embrace those who may be different from us. Our lesson asks us to consider our own unworthiness as sinners redeemed by the grace of God, as we welcome other sinners to join us at this amazing table of grace.
Let me conclude with in the words of Dr. Carlson. “God’s forgiveness in Jesus Christ is a scandal. It goes out to sinners regardless of their religious or social standing. It breaks into human existence without prior invitation. It transforms who we are, whom we understand Go to be, and how we are to live our lives and utilize our resources… It seeks to generate not just an intellectual acknowledgement or a polite thank you but blubbering, messy, wholehearted, continual devotion. It is not something that we control, but something that slams into our lives and takes control. It is not given to us as a result of our love but generates love in us toward God and toward one another.” End quote.
Amen.
