Being a Radical
John 4:1-6
Rev. Dr. Michael Harvey Koplitz
John 4:1 And Jesus knew, that the Pharisees had heard; that he made many disciples, and baptized more than John. 2 Yet Jesus himself did not baptize but his disciples. 3 And he left Judaea, and went again into Galilee. 4 And in going, he had occasion to pass through the midst of the Samaritans. 5 And he came to a city of the Samaritans called Sychar, near the field which Jacob gave to his son Joseph. 6 And Jacob’s well of water was there. And Jesus was weary with the toil of travelling, and seated himself by the well: and it was at the sixth hour.
Jesus going to Samaria is a transition between the testimony to John the Baptist and the start of his ministry. The author has Jesus going to Samaria. The problem with going to Samaria is that Jews of Judea and Galilee did not like Samaritans. The narrative also says that the Pharisees, one of the religious authorities, had taken note of Jesus’s work. The conflict between Jesus and the authorities started in chapter three of John’s Gospel.
An essential aspect of this short passage is that the religious authorities started to notice what Jesus was doing. John the Baptist was fading, and Jesus was rising in popularity. John the Baptist knew that this was the LORD’s plan. He came to introduce the world to Jesus. That task was complete, and it was time to move aside. So, Jesus’ ministry started. Where did Jesus go first? Samaria was not a place Jews traveled.
The Samaritans were considered half Jews. Samaria was the territory of the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Ten of the twelve tribes of Israel were a part of this kingdom. Assyrians came into the Northern Kingdom, conquered it, and spread the population into other parts of their empire. In turn, the Assyrians brought other conquered people into Samaria. That was the way the Assyrians assured that a conquered people would not be able to rise against them.
Not all of the population was relocated. The nobility and well-educated people were generally relocated. The peasants and lower classes were left in Samaria. Over time the original people and the transplanted population intermarried. Thus, half Jews were born. From their point of view, they were descendants of the original ten tribes and should have had the same rights as the Jews in Judea and Galilee. However, that did not happen. Samaritans were considered Gentiles regarding access to the Temple at Jerusalem. The Samaritans built their own Temple on Mount Gezer. Before the Roman occupation, an army from Judea destroyed that Temple.
In Jesus’ day, Jews did not travel into Samaria. There was a shared animosity between these people. A Jewish reader of this Gospel would be surprised that Jesus went to Samaria. The passage commences by saying that the Pharisees were aware of Jesus and the success of his ministry. It can be inferred that Jesus created more disciples than John did. This was quite troubling. This meant that more people were moving away from the Temple influence. The concern was financial because the Temple taxes would have been hard to collect from people who felt they had left the Temple authority. Jesus was a threat. In John’s Gospel, Jesus becomes a threat to the status quo immediately.
Jesus wanted reform in Judaism. He was not looking to create a new religion. However, the Jewish religious leaders were not interested in reform. They liked things the way they were. They were collecting taxes, and that made them happy. Why change what was working for the past years? As with most organizations, corruption sets in, and it is tough to remove corruption from an organization.
Corruption is in the mainline churches of today. You might think I am wrong by saying this, but it is there. When I was in a town in northern Mexico, I sat in the local Catholic church for Sunday worship. I noted that there was a large hole in the roof. I asked my translator why there was a hole in the roof. When it rained, of course, the rain poured in. She told me the church was poor and did not have the money to fix the roof. But in the middle of the worship service, a special collection was taken for the Vatican. Wait a minute, I thought. This church needs to fix the roof. They do not have the money. Yet they sent money to the Vatican.
The last time I checked, the Vatican was pretty wealthy. The Vatican should have sent money to this little church to fix the roof. The money flow was to the Vatican when it should have been the opposite way. To me, this is a form of corruption. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.
It would be neglectful of me not to mention that I saw the same thing in the United Methodist Church. The District Superintendent showed a group of pastors, I was in this group, a video about stewardship. The Bishop of the Baltimore-Washington area spoke about the why and how the local pastors need to get more money from the people and to send it to the General Conference. The General Conference is wealthy. Well, not as much as the Vatican, but they have money.
Now here is the kicker. I noticed that the furniture in the Bishop’s office was Herman Miller furniture. Most of you have probably never heard of Herman Miller. Let me say it is the Rolex of office furniture. That Bishop had a $50,000 office. I asked how a Bishop could tell us to send him money when he was sitting in such an expensive office. The District Superintendent did not reply to the question.
The mainline churches are in need of reform. My son and his family are now attending a local independent church. One thing he likes about it is that there are no hierarchical requirements, especially for the money. That church makes its own rules. I am not saying that this church is 100% clean either. The rise of the independent churches is a movement equivalent to John and Jesus. Independent churches have arisen because the mainline churches require reform.
The divisions in today’s mainline churches and the United Methodist Church is about to divide, demonstrating the need for a focused reform. Leaders on the top of the pyramid make decisions for the entire denomination that the people in the pews are not happy with. Leonard Sweet, many years ago, said that the problem with the United Methodist Church is that the seminaries convert students into liberal religious thinkers, and then they are appointed to conservative thinking churches.
A reformation is needed in our mainline churches now. The longer the churches wait, the worse the situation gets. There will come a day when the mainline churches are going to shut down. The problem is not unsolvable. In Jesus’ day, the Temple leaders did not listen to the needs of the people. Jesus listened to the people. That is one of the answers for today. The leaders of the mainline churches need to listen to the people. They need to discover what the people need. The leaders of the mainline denominations need to reflect the makeup and thinking of the people. These two reforms would make an incredible difference.
Reform may be needed in the local church. If one family controls the church, I was appointed to such a church. The church becomes a family social club and will alienate other people from attending. This situation is one example indicating a need to reform. Take a look at your church. Is there a need for reform?
