Scripture Text (NRSV)
Luke 7:36-8:3
7:36 One of the Pharisees asked Jesus to eat with him, and he went into the Pharisee's
house and took his place at the table.
7:37 And a woman in the city, who was a sinner, having learned that he was eating in
the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster jar of ointment.
7:38 She stood behind him at his feet, weeping, and began to bathe his feet with her
tears and to dry them with her hair. Then she continued kissing his feet and anointing
them with the ointment.
7:39 Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw it, he said to himself, "If
this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what kind of woman this is who is
touching him--that she is a sinner."
7:40 Jesus spoke up and said to him, "Simon, I have something to say to you."
"Teacher," he replied, "Speak."
7:41 "A certain creditor had two debtors; one owed five hundred denarii, and the
other fifty.
7:42 When they could not pay, he canceled the debts for both of them. Now which of them
will love him more?"
7:43 Simon answered, "I suppose the one for whom he canceled the greater
debt." And Jesus said to him, "You have judged rightly."
7:44 Then turning toward the woman, he said to Simon, "Do you see this woman? I
entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has bathed my feet with her
tears and dried them with her hair.
7:45 You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not stopped kissing my
feet.
7:46 You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment.
7:47 Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she
has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little."
7:48 Then he said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."
7:49 But those who were at the table with him began to say among themselves, "Who
is this who even forgives sins?"
7:50 And he said to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace."
8:1 Soon afterwards he went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing
the good news of the kingdom of God. The twelve were with him,
8:2 as well as some women who had been cured of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary,
called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out,
8:3 and Joanna, the wife of Herod's steward Chuza, and Susanna, and many others, who
provided for them out of their resources.
Comments:
This will be my first sunday back in a pulpit after resigning and 2 sundays later leaving my pulpit of 2 years. My thought around this scripture is "What are the resources we share?"
The worship service I will be leading is new to me - a tiny church which has life and love and joy, all the things the church I just left did not.
How do I not make comparisons? How do I stay faithful to the text, and to God's call, when I'm not sure I have much faith to share? Maybe that is what Jesus was saying to the Pharisee... she only had this to share, but shared it with all that she had.... hummmm, hinwomyn in Pa
My plan for Sunday is to link this idea of creative giving to Jesus (using what you have in non-traditional or even unusual ways) with life in the USA in the 1930's. I've heard many of my church members talking about how they didn't have the money
to pledge to missions, so they found new uses for what they had - picked apart old dresses and cut out the good parts to make new quilted layettes for hospital nurseries, unravelled old wool sweaters to knit new hats for poor school children or bed covers for an orphanage. Those new items were a God-send to those who received them, and every stitch and every click of the knitting needle was a God-breeze. I think Jesus would approve of this
creativity with what's at hand, because Jesus is more about what we can give from ourselves - sacrifice of time and effort - than what we can pay money for somebody else to do.
One of the best gifts I ever got from a church member was a telephone call telling me that she would like to take over the mailing of our church newsletters every month. She is physically unable to do much, has little expendable cash, but she could do this. She's been doing it now for about
7 years, and I love her for it! We can all figure out ways to serve just by using what we have right at our fingertips. We just need to think about what it is we have. This woman in the Scripture text did.
Be sure and hear, and /or read words of the gospel song Alabaster Box sung by CeCe Winans. It is an excellent interpretation of this passage. Verse 50 of 7 says alot to all of us. Before we automatically identify with Pharisees, let us look at the actions of the woman.
Shalom
bammamma
Actually, though the lyrics to Winans song are quite moving, I'd hesitate to call it "excellent interpretation" of this particular text. She refers to 'Mary' as the one anointing Jesus with the oil and yet in Luke this woman goes unnamed.
Typically, my thinking goes to grace in such passages. One of the great problems in the church is that we are the one place where people can connect to the grace of God, but we struggle to mirror that grace to others, and often fail miserably. How many "sinners" would feel comfortable coming into church, yet such people had no problem coming to Jesus.
This story reflects the beauty of the grace Christ shows. He not only extends grace to this woman, but also to Simon who has been somewhat graceless. I think of the story of Will Campbell (found in the book "What's So Amazing About Grace?" by Philip Yancey, chapter 11) illustrates how Jesus treated Simon. Campbell had been a civil rights worker. God moved him, however, to develop an outreach ministry to "rednecks" and he's now frequently seen talking with members of the Ku Klux Klan, trying to show them the love of Jesus.
Those at the table wondered at a man who could forgive sins. That is the real question. It is not, "What teaching is this?" but "Who is this who even forgives sins?" Who Jesus is tells us more than what He says. If God Himself forgives sins, even of those who condemn others (like Simon and those at the table), who are we to not do the same?
Not sure where I'm going on this. Just some early rants.
JG in WI
bammamma
Thank you for suggesting "Alabaster Box." Whether the woman is Mary or not, it matters little. It is an excellent interpretation of the hell this woman must have gone through.
Now if I could find the music and get someone to sing it.
JG in WI
For those wondering about the lyrics to the song
"Alabaster Box", here they are.
Verse 1:
The room grew still as she made her way to Jesus
She stumbles through the tears that made her blind
She felt such pain
Some spoke in anger
Heard folks whisper "There's no place here for her kind"
Still on she came through the shame that flushed her face
Until at last she knelt before his feet
And though she spoke no words, everything she said was heard
As she poured her love for the master from her box of alabaster
And I've come to pour my praise on Him like oil
From Mary's alabaster box
Don't be angry if I wash his feet with my tears and I dry them with my hair
You weren't there the night he found me
You did not feel what I felt when he wrapped his love all around me
And you don't know the cost of the oil in my alabaster box
I can't forget the way life used to be
I was a prisoner to the sins that had me bound
I spent all my days
And poured my life without measure
Into a little treasure box I thought I found
Until the day when Jesus came to me
And healed my soul with the wonder of his touch
So now Im giving back to him all the praise he's worthy of
I've been forgiven and that's why I love him so much
And I 've come to pour my praise on him like oil
From Mary's alabaster box
Don't be angry if I wash his feet with my tears
And I dry them with my hair.......my hair
You weren't there
The night Jesus found me
You did not feel what I felt when he wrapped his loving arms around me
And you don't know the cost of the oil
oohhhhhhhhhhhh
You don't know the cost of my praise
You don't know the cost of the oil in my alabaster box
A forgiven sinner expresses great love for Jesus. This humble act reveals what is lacking in the self- righteous who feel no need to be forgiven.
Watch out what you do, for one thing leads to another. Parents frequently issue that admonition to headstrong children. The active conscience raises that warning when one is in the process of overeating. Teachers and pastors frequently stress the theme of courtesy and hospitality in human relations. Habits can spell the difference between whole and broken relationships. Watch what you are doing, therefore, for one thing leads to another.
When Jesus accepted the invitation to eat with Simon the Pharisee, he initiated a series of events in which one thing led to another. Entering the Pharisee's house, Jesus reclined for a meal. A woman, simply described as a sinner, approached Jesus and washed his feet with her copious tears. This kissing and anointing provoked disapproving thoughts in the mind of the Pharisee host. Somehow Jesus discerned the thought, leading him to tell a brief parable with a question about debt cancellation and love. Simon answered rightly, and Jesus then proceeded to speak about hospitality, love, sin, and forgiveness. Not everyone present liked the story. (Who is this who forgives sins?) Yet it concluded with a surprising grace note. (Your faith has saved you; go in peace.) In other words, what began as a dinner invitation ended with a redemptive word.
It is a compelling word for all who have ears to hear. We are invited to a meal where we encounter the risen Christ. We sinners are free to approach the living Lord and receive forgiveness. We can read the story about a tearful woman and learn about hospitality and respect for the guest in our midst. If we listen, we hear the teacher observe that we should watch what we are doing, for one thing leads to another. An encounter with Jesus could take us anywhere.
The story of Mary anointing Jesus' feet with the perfume from the "alabaster box" is a completely different story. Mary was Lazarus' sister and the anointing was after Lazarus was raised and before Jesus' death in Mary, Martha, and Lazarus' house. In that story it was Judas complaining about the "waste" of the cost of the perfume. We read that on the Fifth Sunday in Lent (John 12.1-8).
This text reminded us the contrast between the broken people and the proper one.
The broken woman did NOT break the alabaster jar (aha, gotcha! This text didn't say that at all!) but her heart over Jesus (weeping at the feet, wiping them with her hair). The proper Pharisee was acusing Jesus for not acting properly, and ended up being confronted by Jesus for his own improper accomodation to a guest (not giving water for his feet).
How we respond to Jesus depended upon how do we see ourselves before God. Interestingly, that would also determine how he respond back to us as well.
Lord, help me to remember who I was before you so that I would respond to others in mercy; and ALSO help me to remember who I am infront of you, so that I would respond to YOU in proper conducts.
Just a new thing I haven't noticed before, that is this woman was NOT Mary Magdalene. If it was so, 8:2 would have made the connection there.
Coho, Midway City.
Question: did the woman repent before Jesus gave absolution? Her tears would indicate that she did, but then does that mean forgiveness "requires" confession first? If so, what of grace - the unconditional gift? I have always thought we couldn't celebrate communion without confession until one of my supervisors reminded me that I was putting conditions on grace. Help! HSinON
Fred Craddock writes this about the woman:
"Perhaps the first act in interpreting this passage is to separate it from the anointing stories of Matthew 26:6-13, Mark 14:3-9, and John 12:1-8; otherwise those accounts may bleed through into Luke and hinder a proper listening to this text. Clearly Luke's is not a parallel story, but hints and similarities are enough to tease the mind. For example, Matthew and Mark agree with Luke that the name of the host was Simon, but they identify him as a leper. John agrees with Luke that the woman anointed Jesus' feet, not his head; but John also agrees with the others that the anointing was in Bethany, while Luke's story is apparently set in Galilee. Matthew and Mark agree with Luke that the woman is unnamed; John says she was Mary sister of Lazarus in whose home the incident occurred. The three others place the event late in Jesus' ministry and relate it to his death; Luke's story is one of love and forgiveness. What can we say about all of this? It may be that the Gospels reflect sources oral or written that spoke of one, two, or even three anointings, but as we receive the traditions, Luke must be understood as sufficiently distant from the others in location, time, and purpose to be considered entirely on its own."
HS in ON, you ask a terrific question, one we could debate here for a long time. I, for one, have always believed that God's grace knows no condition, including a need for any vocal confession. We are forgiven before any words can form in our thoughts. We are forgiven before we consider our need for forgiveness.
Personally, I think the process of asking for forgiveness in the form of words and even prostration is for our sakes, not God's. We feel we have to "do something" in order to receive grace.
If we don't, we figure we haven't done our part to
be recipients. And we've been conditioned in our interactions with people that if we don't ask for forgiveness, we remain separated from the person we have wronged.
I think what we need to do is to accept the forgiveness that God offers so freely and without condition. We act at the END of the transaction, not at the BEGINNING of it. It is God who moves toward us and gives, we put out our hands and receive, and give thanks for his boundless love. Then we go out and live our lives responding to God's love by loving and forgiving others whether they ask for forgiveness or not.
I realize many will disagree with me on this, but it's where I firmly stand in my belief on forgiveness and grace.
I would like to know what became of this unnamed woman after she was forgiven. Did her life change?
Did she forgive others as she was forgiven? While we will never know for sure, I imagine this had a very positive outcome for many people in her life.
KHC
Historical note: the Greek custom of dining involved a gathering of men reclined on couches. After the meal, the doors would be opened to travelling entertainers of various sorts - singers, jugglers, often strippers, who went from house to house. So it was not an astonishing invasion to have a strange woman, and a "known sinner" at that, enter the house.
Simon must have been exceedingly embarrassed to have this "sinning woman" enter his house in the Teacher's presence. Either this was entirely new to him as a proper Pharisee, or the woman had previous experience entertaining at his house, and either way he found it very socially awkward.
I wonder if that's the key: Simon saw this woman as A Social Embarrassment to Himself, and A Discredit to Jesus' Prophetic Ability. He did not see a person loved and redeemed by God. Jesus reminded him of the reality of the person in front of him, and maybe gently poked Simon verbally as if to say, "It's not all about you, Simon."
The other thought that occurs to me with this text is in the category of "The Stupid Gifts We Give Jesus." The woman came with an open and generous heart, but only half-prepared (oh, damn, forgot the towel! use hair instead) and gave Jesus a wet, tickly foot-rub. I regularly give Jesus things he probably doesn't want - my despair, cynicism, inadequacy, frustration - and he accepts it along with the better things I have to give. I often come half-prepared, and yet he seems prepared to accept my feeble efforts.
My child gives me crafts and art that, objectively, don't deserve to hang in an art gallery; but loyally, I think they're beautiful. Maybe that's the spirit in which Jesus received the woman's half-prepared, even half-irritating gift.
Not preaching this week... Good luck to all...
LF
PS Hey, where's Eric in OH?
I have heard there could be a possibility that the woman in Luke 7 was the same woman in John who was being stoned until Jesus intervened..." let s/he who has NOT sinned cast the 1st stone "
If that were true, grace was received prior to the woman's asking. Kaiross
Anonymous -
I don't think it matters that CeCe Winans says "Mary" but Luke doesn't name her. That's easily addressed and corrected from the pulpit.
Sally in GA
LF
You read my mind. When I first looked at this passage my thoughts ran quickly to vs. 44-46. I think that this story is as much about the things we Christian pharisees don't do for Jesus, as it is about the woman's elaborate gift to him. Or, as LF notes, it may be about "The Stupid Gifts We Give Jesus." I've titled my message, "How Hospitable!?" It's a tongue in cheek title that I believe points out a painful truth -- we are not any better at hosting Jesus than Simon. I'm still fleshing out the details, but, LF, your post is absolutely on target.
Steve in NC
"[BEHOLD] A woman who was a sinner in the city": What was it like to have a reputation of a sinner in the community? (Note the "Behold" the the Gk. here)
"...[having learned] that He...": What was it about Him that draw her in? Was it His compassion as shown in His teaching in Luke 6?
"...He was eating in the Pharisee's house": What made her decided to dare come into the dinner uninvited? Couldn't she find any other less embarass opportunity than this?
"...[having obtained] an abalaster jar of ointment": Was it just a mean for her to get close to Him? Or was it the best she could offer? Or was it anyway relating to her sins?
"[having stood] behind him at his feet": How did she get in anyway? What were the reaction of people toward her entrance?
"weeping [she herself showered] his feet with tears": Why did she cry? Did she intend to come at His feet to cry? Or were the reaction of people around her driving her there?
"and she [was drying] it with her hair, [was kissing] his feet, and [was smearing] the perfume...": Was these actions trying to make up for her un-controllable crying?
LF: from the grammatical nuances of the text, she was not half-prepared. She was prepared as best as she could, but she could not anticipate the full power of that encounter.
HS in ON: "Her tears indicated her repentance before forgiveness", you said it well. But what about grace? Grace was happening even before her repentance, by the availablity of Jesus in her town, by the [having learned] of who Jesus is, and by the strengthening of God on her ability to trust in His goodness so that she can approach Him.
According to my understanding, grace and forgiveness are two different things. Grace can be seen as the universal availability of forgiveness in Christ for all, while some could choose not to access that forgiveness.
Once again, just like KHC said, "I realize many will disagree with me on this, but it's where I firmly stand in my belief on forgiveness and grace."
Coho, Midway City.
oops - sorry, JG in WI had already responded. I'm reading and posting at the same time... Still, JG, I don't even try in my congregation (we're lucky to get up a quartet - and my husband and I are two of those parts!) Yet, folks have appreciated when I've played it for them on a CD - like, for the offertory.
Good stuff here, y'all. I especially resound with KHC's "we act at the end of the transaction (of forgiveness/grace)... that's rich. The text does not say one way or another whether the woman confessed or whether confession for forgiveness is even necessary - so it's not completely fair to assume one or another way. However, the fact that the text does not say (nor does any other, if I recall) explicitly perhaps indicates its level of importance - not important enough to write down. (?? just a thought)
And LF, you bring up something that also resounds - it reminds me of the time I went to pick up an elderly woman to come to our "Silver Circle" meeting. Now, let me set this up a bit: the existing participants in Silver Circle had been complaining about their low attendance... I did what I could to bolster it, but was kind of irritated that they expected me to provide their entertainment (because the preacher has always done that!) :-) Anyways, I'd gotten this call from a woman who is caring for her elderly mother and looking for things for her to do. She asked about our "senior program," Well, we had no transportation (as the woman on the phone asked), so I volunteered to pick the elderly woman up and take her home. Based on where she livede, I figured she'd be of another race than the rest of us, but since it's the ritzy area she lives in, I figured it would be "ok" with the Silver Circle. I found her home, picked her up, and brought her easily enough, but I was in for a bit of a surprise. The woman had more than one screw loose. I think it was a senility-type thing, but she was definitely off her rocker - her conversation seemed to be isolated thoughts, and she couldn't really respond to what I said, either. It was just "off."
I got her to silver Circle and they stared daggers through me. No one spoke to her, even though she tried to speak to them. I tried to include her - and I have to admit that I feel a bit like LF's Simon. *sigh* true confession time here:
I was embarrassed, or ashamed, or something for doing the "wrong" thing.
I part company with LF, however, about the hair - that she was ill-prepared.
Helen Pearson reminds us, in her book, "Do What You Have the Power to Do," that a woman's hair was her "glory" (recall the OT - Deuteronomy? - references, plus the Pauline ones). She gave Jesus her glory.
Sally in GA
PS - yeah, where is ol' Eric these days? I've been missing him!
Eric H.F. Law refers to this pericope in the second chapter of his book "Inclusion". The second chapter is called "This Fellow Welcomes Sinners and Eats with Them."
Shalom
bammamma
One has to wonder why the Pharisee, who was no doubt schooled in the social niceties, neglected to bestow them upon Jesus. One also has to wonder why a Pharisee invited Jesus to dine in the first place.
One has to wonder how a known "sinful woman" got in the front door unannounced without getting stopped -protecting one's guests from humiliating or dangerous situations was part of the duty of the host, according to Jewish custom.
It could have been a plot to set Jesus up. The woman may have been a "plant" to see if Jesus had divine insight into people's character. I see the entire thing as a set-up to catch Jesus in one way or another. And once again, he foiled the plot, not by walking away, but by a speech on debts and forgiveness. That would sure stop me in my tracks.
Just early ramblings, nothing really "on" yet..
KHC
"and she was a sinner" - as I try to imagine how that phrase was said and received during the oral phase of transmission, I wonder if it wasn't with mock horror combined with a smile - after all, don't we all know there isn't anyone who isn't a sinner? Maybe those who first told this story enjoyed hearing Jesus get the better of Simon. Don't we enjoy hearing stories of our 'heroes' oursmarting their foes? And as a bonus, we hear again the words of grace "Your sins are forgiven."
Deb in York
KHC - wow! you're inspired this week (well, you almost always are, but this week seems to be hitting me personally)!!!
I know I've been in set-ups like what you describe - even at dinners or other "invitations" that turned out to be ambushes. Maybe it was planned as an ambush, or maybe it just sort of "turned into" an ambush. Fact is, almost all us preachers have weathered this particular scenario!!!
Sometimes at a dinner, sometimes at a Bible study, sometimes at a Prayer Meeting, sometimes when you run into someone in the grocery store. Isn't it par for the course to be "tested," much like 2 yr old children test their parents' limits?
Was it an ambush? Y'know, you could really be on to something, KHC. Thanks!!!!
Sally in gA
Sally & KHC,
But can you really preach that? Can we preach our speculation rather than what is in the text? (Sorry for asking, but I just got beaten on my Homiletic final for "making things up".)
Seminarian
Seminarian, no we can't preach speculation. But I don't think it's off target to mention that this setting is weird. If we are aware of the Jewish customs of the day and the persnickity nature of most of the Pharisees, then the invitation of a Pharisee to Jesus, the lack of expected hospitality
between host and invited guest, and the unchecked intrusion of a questionable character into the dinner party seem highly suspicious. The information about the dinner WAS shared with us; I guess we are free to combine it with our knowledge of Jewish customs as we interpret the text.
My point was that once again Jesus saw through the devious and spiteful nature of the Pharisee and
purposefully spoke with love to the needy person. I'm not sure that's such a stretch. It was a lesson the Pharisee needed to learn and certainly one we do, too.
Of course, this might have been one of those nice
Pharisees who just wanted a chance to listen to Jesus for an evening and got bamboozled by this
woman popping in without anybody seeing her. If so, he was in danger of being reprimanded by some of his more zealous colleagues. But I don't see it that way.
Peace.
KHC
Seminarian: "Can we preach our speculation rather than what is in the text?" Good question. It certainly calls for God's Holy Wisdom! You don't want to go to either extreme of being text-bound or off on your own imaginative flight.
My suggestion is always to first let the text challenge you. If possible read it in its original language (I expect Coho will agree!) and try to get a sense of it in its cultural setting. Read it with great care and sensitivity. Notice any words that strike you.
You can even "move" the text, or act it out: Nothing will make the point of the healing of the paralytic like lying horizontal all your life, and then having a dramatic change in perspective (literally) after encountering Jesus.
After you let the text "have its way with you" (a horrible phrase from Will Willimon, but you get the idea) then let your imagination spark off it. Don't be afraid to bring your imagination to the task. Preaching is an engaging, life-giving activity - you aren't writing a thesis to impress other academics.
Speculation can be fun, and I certainly use it, but use caution. The people are there to hear the Word of God, to be judged and inspired by it. Your own speculation on a given text can highlight details that no one noticed, and can be an enjoyable and engaging aspect of your preaching... but be careful, and use speculation sparingly.
If I were sitting in your pew, I think I would be able to discern where your speculation gave an interesting spin to the text, and where you were just making stuff up. The latter would make me uncomfortable. You really don't have to make up stuff: honestly, there's enough there already!
Be judicious in your use of speculation. 'Nuff said.
LF
That a Pharisee asked Jesus to dinner should be met with neither suspicion nor surprise: not suspicion, because there is no evidence a trap was being set; nor surprise, because Jesus had much in common with these lovers of the law of Moses and leaders of the synagogue. This is not a solitary instance of Jesus dining in the home of a Pharisee (Lk 11.37; 14.1). And besides, no general image of Pharisees matched any one of them in particular. Furthermore, for Jesus to eat with tax collectors and sinners and refuse table fellowship with Pharisees would have made him as guilty of reverse prejudice as some of us who discover in our zeal to right wrongs we develop prejudices against the prejudiced, a condition that places us in the camp of those we charge with standing in the way of God's reign on earth. We learn from the story that the Pharisee's name is Simon; there is no reason to identify the woman as Mary Magdalene. Houses in that culture were so constructed that the woman's entrance required no break-in, and since dining occured in a reclining position, anointing Jesus' feet should not conjure up the image of a woman crawling around under a table.
Let us think of the account as a small drama. The setting is a Pharisee's home where the host Simon, Jesus, and others are dining. The context creates in us an anticipation of tension, but there is none at the outset. We do not learn until later that for some reason Simon had not extended to Jesus the customary courtesies of hospitality: foot washing, anointing, and a kiss. The crisis in the drama is created by the entrance of "a woman of the city." That Jesus does not expel her is proof to Simon that Jesus is no prophet; if he were, he would know that the woman is a sinner. Simon thinks this but does not say it. However, Jesus knows Simon's thoughts, proof by Simon's own criterion that Jesus is a prophet.
The solution of the crisis is a bit surprising. The reader is inclined to see in the story one sharp contrast, that which is so evident between Simon and Jesus. Here are two religious leaders suddenly in the presence of a sinful woman. One has an understanding of righteousness which causes him to distance himself from her; the other understands righteousness to mean moving toward her with forgiveness and a blessing of peace. However, the context should have alerted us that the contrast Luke has in mind is between Simon and the woman in their response to Jesus. They make specific the earlier statement to the effect that sinners receive and Pharisees reject the purpose of God offered by John and Jesus. The irony here is that even though Jesus is a guest in Simon's home, it is a sinner who extends hospitality. Even though some commentators speak of the erotic implications of this woman's behavior toward Jesus (letting her tears fall on his feet, wiping his feet with her hair, kissing his feet, anointing them with ointment), it is clear in Luke's telling that she is extending the hospitality Simon had witheld. This is Jesus' interpretation of her actions: water for the feet (tears), the kiss of welcome, and the anointing for one coming in from a journey exposed to the heat of the day. The brief parable of the two debtors ensnares Simon in a recognition of the difference between his behavior toward Jesus and that of the woman. Her behavior is that of a person who has been forgiven. Verse 47 is awkward, seeming to say that her love earned her forgiveness. The contrary is more likely: because she was forgiven much, she loved much. The NEB translates it: "And so, I tell you, her great love proves that her many sins have been forgiven."
The drama concludes in a christological dispute, bringing into sharp focus question of Jesus' identity and authority to forgive sins. The murmuring among the other guests recalls the controversy reported at 5:17-26. The final word to the woman, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace," seems a bit out of place and may have once existed as the conclusion to another episode. The use of floating sayings to round off stories is not infrequent in the Gospels, and this may be one of them. After all, the commendable quality in the woman in this story is not her faith but her love. Setting the question of proper context aside, the word of Jesus "Go in peace" adds considerable pathos to the event. Where does one go when told by Christ "Go in peace"? The price of the woman's way of life in the city has been removal from the very institutions that carried the resources to restore her. The one place where she is welcome is the street, among people like herself. What she needs is a community of forgiven and forgiving sinners. The story screams the need for a church, not just any church but one that says, "You are welcome here."
I appreciate William Barclay's commentary on this pericope. He points out several things I intend to use this Sunday: To have a visiting Rabbi to dinner was a social coup for Simon. This would explain his lack of courtesies. He was a social climber. Dinners were held in the courtyard of the house and passersby were allowed entry to hear the gems of wisdom spoken by the celebrity guest. As usual, Jesus turned the ordinary into the sacred. Pastor Rick in FL
HSinON,
I think about the necessity of verbal repenting before there is forgiveness. It seems very conditional.
I don't think at all that the story is about "proper" repentence at all. But the fact is that for our hearts to recieve forgiveness, we have to realize our sinfulness. The woman was told of her sinfulness all the time, so she was aware, but the pharisee wasn't aware before Jesus told him.
I don't think this (or many) parables tell us of a specific way that we must confess or repent of our sins. But it does help us be aware of them.
jw in tx
Pastor Rick, the text clearly states that Jesus went into the house and sat at the table there. Verses 36 and 37.
jw in tx says "The woman was told of her sinfulness all the time, so she was aware, but the pharisee wasn't aware before Jesus told him."
Verse 39 would contradict that.
As to the question about whether repentence is required for forgiveness... it has been my opinion for some time that God does not require it of us -- but that *we* need the act of repentence. GOd's grace is just that -- unearned -- but we can't accept it until we have acknowledged our sins.
Just my $.02
~Squeeze
Seminarian,
I agreed with LF there; stay close to the text (and even consider all the literal variants of the text, all the high and low criticisms of the text) to the point that you can be certain what was the Word of God (even with any imperfect nuances created by fallen human). Almost all the time, the main point of the text is glaringly clear.
In this case of our passage, no one can argue that Luke intended to contrast the two here, as the anonymous poster below LF's entry was eloquently stated. (By the way, thanks for pointing out that Simon obviously knew of the woman's ill repute, and he was awaiting Jesus discernment as proof of His prophetic office. Jesus must have been a "visiting scholar" at this city).
What about the historical background? We would certainly supplement our understanding of the text with auxiliary knowledge about historical backgrounds, but we also need to be a bit careful there since what could be the norm in Rome may not be the same in Jerusalem or Capernaum. Plus, unless we have evidence of consistent patterns throughout archeological findings, making assumptions base on one or two occurrences will get ourselves in a lot of trouble.
All of that work, just to help transport us accurately back in history; to hear the Word of God with the ears of Simon, of the woman, or even of Theophilus; and to see with their eyes, or even the eyes of Jesus. The more work we put in, the less speculative we could be, and the more we can stay true to the written Word.
Then you SHOULD leave all that work behind (or atleast, make it interesting enough for the heares). I am sure that your homiletic professor would also exhort you NOT to bring all that scholastic knowledge into the sermon and bore the congregation to death, right? Mine did.
Arming with what the timeless truth of what the Word of God said back then, we must construct what it says to our audience today. Imagination is priceless here. And pour your prayer in, so that the Spirit of God will breath life into that transformation, bring life into the sermon skeleton, turn Logos into Rhema, and the Word become flesh in the life of your hearers.
May God bless your journey as His messenger.
Coho, Midway City.
To those of you who are worried about "speculation" or as I would prefer to call it "imagination" a couple of comments. Petr Marshall was one of the great preachers in the Presbyterian Church (US) or southern curch during the middle of the last century, and he advised seminarians to cultivate a "holy imagination." Also, you might want to look at Barbara Lundblad's book "Transforming the Stone: Preaching Through Resistance to Change."
For me, preaching is an act of the imagination (see Troeger's "Imagining the Sermon"),which does not mean made up or false, but refers to finding creative ways for people to become moved by the text (and I happen to like Willimon's phrase "letting the text have its way with us).
When you stop and think about it, faith, hope, and love, are acts of imagination- and they are what abides (keeps on keeping on).
okay,end of soapbox speech
revgilmer in texarkana
We live in a broken world with a lot of broken people (ourselves included if we're honest and not pharisiacal). The brokeness in the world needs God's forgiveness. Let's focus on that. How it comes to us. How we do/don't deserve it. How it changes our life.
And for my $.02, this begs the question: which is worse being a sinner or having sin in the heart? It seems that just the label of "sinner" became a self-fulfilling prophesy for this woman and Jesus came in to set the record straight.
None of us can be too far away to receive forgiveness.
We live in a broken world with a lot of broken people (ourselves included if we're honest and not pharisiacal). The brokeness in the world needs God's forgiveness. Let's focus on that. How it comes to us. How we do/don't deserve it. How it changes our life.
And for my $.02, this begs the question: which is worse being a sinner or having sin in the heart? It seems that just the label of "sinner" became a self-fulfilling prophesy for this woman and Jesus came in to set the record straight.
None of us can be too far away to receive forgiveness.
Jezebel and the Sinful Woman:
I am struck by how the first Lesson and the Gospel relate. We have a hoarding Queen and a giving sinner. We have a jealous Pharisee and a jealous Jezebel. Indeed, Jesus is the "little herb garden" in the home of the Pharisee. The Pharisee (acting like Ahab and Jezebel) want the garden to themselves. The sinful woman is Naboth, poor and without power, easily criticised, easily put away and ignored, and "killed." Jesus affirms the lowly (the Magnificant) and supports her. Naboth is supported by Elijah, though it is too late. It seems to me that the the theme of the two lessons are about jealousy more than forgiveness. It seems to me that the message of Galatians is simply that the gospel would have freed Naboth of his willfulness, giving him a different property, which is also a "garden" Jesus Christ, a garden that the tears of the sinful woman waters.
tom in ga
Is sinner a moral term (as we would supposedly use it)or is it a technical term that those who considered themselves righteous (following the law correctly, which was what the Pharisess tried to do) that referred to those that Luke Timothy Johnson in his "Writings of the New Testament calls the 'people of the land' those who were so busy trying to stay alive that they didn't have either the time or the energy to follow all that the Pharisees thought they should be doing.
any thoughts?
revgilmer in texarkana
unsigned: recall the Craddock commentary someone posted earlier this week - be careful not to let other of these stories (from other Gospels) influence interpreting this one. This is John, not Luke, and though all inform us of who Jesus is, LUke and John are different. We must try to take this from the Johannine point of view - one thinks first of love, and next, of Jesus' many red-letter words, and third, of Jesus' indication of who he is (Jn 4).
Also - Seminarian - no, we can't preach speculation - we preach on the text, and then sometimes wonder. I'm not ready to draw a conclusion that this was an ambush, or that the ambush is the point of the pericope. What the point is - is love (I sound like Gordon) - from the Johannine perspective, and the forgiveness of sins, and of course the returning of love in grateful worship.
It's just that I feel like my post was the one that prompted your question and I want to clear up the confusion. I toss around many thoughts on this forum, and dismiss many - eventually. I also didn't want to "pull focus" from the star characters in the story - the woman, and Jesus. But it does put those actions into an interesting context when we consider what the supporting characters did, and what their "motivations" are/were. (I'm freely borrowing theater language, forgive me).
Yet - I've heard (and even read in a study we're doing) many, many preachers say that the reason Jesus said, "God, why have you forsaken me" is because God couldn't stand to look at him, being as he took on our sin and all, which made him too ugly for God to look at ... Now, THAT's made up! It's not in the Bible and is pure conjecture from air.
Sally in gA
I intend to introduce this speculation. We've got the who, the what, the when, the where, but we don't have the why. Given the feelings of the Temple Jews about Jesus' non-conventional thoughts,
it stands to reason that there was something up here. Before I read this pericope, I will tell the congregation about the custom of footwashing, of reclining, and of protecting guests at all costs. I will tell them about the animosity the Pharisees had for Jesus. I will
I intend to introduce this speculation. We've got the who, the what, the when, the where, but we don't have the why. Given the feelings of the Temple Jews about Jesus' non-conventional thoughts,
it stands to reason that there was something up here. Before I read this pericope, I will tell the congregation about the custom of footwashing, of reclining, and of protecting guests at all costs. I will tell them about the animosity the Pharisees had for Jesus. I will
Off topic: anybody have any suggestions about communicating with congregations about patriotism/flags/the blurring of lines between religious fervor and xenophobic nationalism? I dissapointed people on Memorial Day by not worshipping country instead of God, and I'm trying to get through July 4 without yards of bunting. How can I explain why having the national flag in the sanctuary doesn't seem to me to be a good idea. kbc in sc
Hi LF, Sally, et al. I'm around. Haven't had much to say in recent weeks as special events in the life of the congregation have taken me away from the Lectionary (plus we've been through a period where the Episcopal BCP lectionary differs somewhat from the RCL).
FOr example, the OT this week is different, and the Gospel in the BCP selection ends at v. 7:50. If ours extended to the chapter 8 verses, I'd look at the place of women in the Gospels....
Lovely hymn from our friends in the United Church of Canada:
A prophet woman broke a jar, //
by love's divine appointing. //
With rare perfume //
she filled the room, //
presiding and anointing. //
A prophet woman broke a jar, //
the sneers of scorn defying. //
With rare perfume //
she filled the room, //
preparing Christ for dying. //
A faithful woman left a tomb //
by Love's divine commission. //
She saw, she heard, //
she preached the Word, //
arising from submission. //
A faithful woman left a tomb, //
with resurrection gospel. //
She saw, she heard, //
she preached the Word, //
apostle to apostles. //
Though woman wisdom, woman truth, //
for centuries were hidden, //
unsung, unwritten, and unheard, //
derided and forbidden, //
the Spirit's breath, the Spirit's fire, //
on free and slave descending, //
can tumble our dividing walls, //
our shame and sadness mending. //
The Spirit knows, the Spirit calls, //
by Love's divine ordaining, //
the friends we need //
to serve and lead, //
their powers and gifts unchaining. //
The Spirit knows, the Spirit calls, //
from women, men, and children, //
the friends we need, //
to serve and lead. //
Rejoice, and make them welcome. //
This hymn is found in "Voices United", The United Church of Canada hymnbook, #590.
Blessings, Eric in OH
KBC in SC
Flags and Patriotism:
I guess the first question is whether or not your church currently has an American flag in the sanctuary? If not, there is no reason to place one there! The Body of Christ transcends geographical boundaries. The church is "not" an American Religion. Praying for our country and her leaders are important; singing national hymns are justifiable; but we are a people whose citizenship is elsewhere.
I am planning to use the propers for Independence Day, but preach on the scripture. If there is something to be learned well and good. What is so very difficult today is that as a people we are so divided - we no longer listen to one another, we scream our politics in the ear of the other. (I may say this). It is time to build up the common good, to lay down our politics for the good of the country and to build a new humanity grounded in faith, hope, and love.
tom in ga
This passage says to me; "Awareness requires grace.
One doesn't have to understand the woman desperate act to appreciate it. One does have to have a gracious heart. We learn that from Jesus when we are challenged to reflect on our own criticisms of others.
Bill in PA
A variety of opinions reside in any congregation on how, or whether, to express patriotism in worship. Some want a flag marched up the center aisle alongside the processional cross, some see worship as transcending nationality. Some remember "the good war," others bear the pains of Vietnam; still others have no military experience, and wonder why patriotism is so tied to war. American flag etiquette is built around the principle that the flag should never be displayed in such a way that it is not the primary symbol in a room. In church the symbols of cross, altar, font, book, and the assembly itself are primary.
It is good to acknowledge by name those in military service--and name those who serve in other community vocations too. Pray for our nation and its leaders; pray for companion synods. Pray for those who serve in global missions and tell their stories.
Barry Harte
This is one of the better discussions (and that's saying something) on this site. Another question- is this pericope about grace - "woman, your sins are forgiven" or about judgment on Simon for his hardness of heart "the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little" I think about some of my congregation who are so judgmental about everyone who is different from their race, their politics, their social position.Also, is it important to hear Simon's thought that if Jesus was really a prophet, he would have known what type of woman this was , and as Craddock writes "would have repulsed her". Of course, then Jesus proves he is a prophet by knowing Simon's thoughts.
I also seem to notice in Luke that the appropriate response to Jesus is often "I am a sinner" Eugene Peterson translates Peter's response to Jesus as "Master, leave. I'm a sinner and can't handle this holiness. Leave me to myself" and Jesus' response is "There is nothing to fear"
Or the interesting idea that the one who eats with tax collectors and sinners also sits at table with those who condemn such people. Haven't we ourselves sometimes thought "Lord, I am grateful that I am just not like those people who listen to _________ (put the name of your least favorite political or religious commentator here)
revgilmer in texarkana
revgilmer in texarkana,
Great thought! Made me look again at the "Your sins are forgiven" (plural), instead of "Your sin are forgiven" (singular). Definitely moral sins here and not the technical sense.
Coho.
Dear Sally, KHC, LF, Coho, revgilmer, Eric, et al
Thanks for the postings. I couldn't agree more and appreciate your insights. Especially like the idea of Stupid Gifts we give Jesus, and thanks to ? for the Craddock quote. You might remember that this is a favorite passage of mine and I do like to let my "sanctified imagination" run wild with the possibilities. If Mtt. 26:13 is based on Mark's earlier account (which includes the fact that the vial was broken),then aparently John writing later still chose to include the name of the individual doing the annointing, the question remains why Luke places the annointing early in Jesus' ministry.The Lord had certainly stated that wherever the Gospel in proclaimed the "good/beautiful thing" done should be retold. If the one in Luke's story is not the same as the one referred to by Matthew, Mark, and possibly John, then one wonders why Luke, who states he is trying to be a stickler for details, would omit telling something Jesus said He wanted told. It is at least possible that the earlier annointing is subsequently repeated, with a fuller appreciation of the ministry of Jesus, by the same person. That would let Luke off the hook with Jesus command to tell her story, but it opens other questions as to the identity of the sinful woman. We know that Lazarus' sister, Mary, was responsible for one occasion where feet were wet with tears and dried with hair. Culturally, this was extremely inappropriate. How many occasions must we posit where this occured? Hope you have fun sorting this out. This week I'm preaching on Naboth's garden. No doubt the point of all our preaching will center on God's offer of forgiveness to those who are humble and repentant no matter how sinful we may be. Blessings to all.TA in MS
Dear Sally, KHC, LF, Coho, revgilmer, Eric, et al
Thanks for the postings. I couldn't agree more and appreciate your insights. Especially like the idea of Stupid Gifts we give Jesus, and thanks to ? for the Craddock quote. You might remember that this is a favorite passage of mine and I do like to let my "sanctified imagination" run wild with the possibilities. If Mtt. 26:13 is based on Mark's earlier account (which includes the fact that the vial was broken),then aparently John writing later still chose to include the name of the individual doing the annointing, the question remains why Luke places the annointing early in Jesus' ministry.The Lord had certainly stated that wherever the Gospel in proclaimed the "good/beautiful thing" done should be retold. If the one in Luke's story is not the same as the one referred to by Matthew, Mark, and possibly John, then one wonders why Luke, who states he is trying to be a stickler for details, would omit telling something Jesus said He wanted told. It is at least possible that the earlier annointing is subsequently repeated, with a fuller appreciation of the ministry of Jesus, by the same person. That would let Luke off the hook with Jesus command to tell her story, but it opens other questions as to the identity of the sinful woman. We know that Lazarus' sister, Mary, was responsible for one occasion where feet were wet with tears and dried with hair. Culturally, this was extremely inappropriate. How many occasions must we posit where this occured? Hope you have fun sorting this out. This week I'm preaching on Naboth's garden. No doubt the point of all our preaching will center on God's offer of forgiveness to those who are humble and repentant no matter how sinful we may be. Blessings to all.TA in MS
Eric - thanks for the hymn.
Friends - thanks for the help on the patriotism question. Yes, the flag is presently in the sanctuary. I got in trouble for doing the Pentecost thing instead of Memorial Day. I could tell nobody thought Pentecost was all that important ... - kbc in sc
kbc in sc:
"I could tell nobody thought Pentecost was all that important" compared with Memorial Day?!? Ouch!
A thought occurred to me: In order to draw your congregation's focus from Memorial Day toward Pentecost, you might consider leading them with the concept of "esprit de corps." That is, an organization or community (such as the Marines) can have its own spirit, its own values. Then (with all due respect to the Marines) how the Church is a community with a unique Spirit, and values. It is a community that has changed, and continues to change, the world.
Armies have won and lost, come and gone (poke your congregation with that, if you dare!) but God will have a Church. And the "esprit" (Holy Spirit)within this "corps" (Body of Christ) is not the product of human enthusiasm, but of divine origin. We have real esprit de corps, and an unbreakable power given to us by the Broken One.
Okay, all this sounded a lot better in my head... but hey, you have a year to work on this!
Peace,
LF
I'm intrigued by the subject of when this woman may have been a recipient of grace. I hate speculation as much as everyone here seems to, but I see something interesting in Jesus' parable.
If we examine the parable (vv. 41-42), the issue is how much one loves after one has already been forgiven. It seems that his woman did not come (and I base this on the parable) in order to be forgiven, but to display her love after she had been forgiven. If she came in order to be forgiven, the parable seems meaningless. So what's happening here (as I see it) is not that Jesus forgave her in this setting. It seems that, somehow, she had already been forgiven by God and that Jesus had, somehow, in the unrecorded story of Jesus, communicated that God had forgiven her. She came to say "thank you," not "forgive me." When Jesus said (v. 48), "Your sins are forgiven," He was not forgiving her, but publically declaring that forgiveness had taken place.
Now, folks, if I'm off here, I'm more than ready to be corrected.
JG in WI
JG,
That is exactly what I was trying to understand...the link between the parable and the story of the Pharisee and the woman. I *gasp* speculated that she was the one for whom much had been forgiven and the Pharisee may have been the city's finest adherent of the Law(thus not "needing" as much forgiveness--if that's possible). Was the Pharisee in awe of Jesus or was he suspicious of him? Was he too proud to be hospitable? Did Jesus know all this and let it play out for Simon to see his lack of love and compassion?
~~Paulo
PR in IA, wouldn't a UN flag serve the same purpose as having all those others and be better stewardship with your church's money?
God bless the USA.
Thank a vet for your freedom to worship.
Your conservative right-wing knee-jerk harsh backwoods fundamentalist pal, PC in GA
(Taking Pepto for my nausea from last week)
Its an old old question: the relation between works and grace. The text seems to suggest that the forgiveness actually comes after the womans act:
"Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven, loves little." 7:48 Then he said to her, "Your sins are forgiven."
Is her gratitude anticipatory? Is her forgiveness contingent upon her act of kindness?
Ole Jersey Movin' Van
kbc in sc, if you're interested, here's how I handled the Memorial Day/Pentecost Sunday conflict.
I created a Memorial Day bulletin insert that had a picture of a military graveyard awash with flags, and underneath it I typed "America Remembers", and typed in lines underneath that. I asked the congregation to write down the names of significant people in their lives who should be remembered on MD. On the reverse, I had a picture of a Navy plane, typed in "America Prays For", and more lines - on these lines, the congregation was asked to list the names of people they knew who were now serving in dangerous places, or who might soon be deployed. During our Passing of the Peace, they were asked to put their papers in one spot. During our time of Joys and Concerns, these names were all read, either In Memoriam or in a prayer for safety. I also talked to the children about Memorial Day very briefly.
That freed up the rest of the service to concentrate on Pentecost, and nobody felt like MD had been shunned.
I do this most Sundays when there is a push for
a church celebration of a national holiday, including Mother's Day, Father's Day, Grandparent's Day, etc.
Maybe somebody can adapt this idea for future use. If not, that's fine. Peace.
If this double-posts, it's because it would not go through the first time.
KHC
Ole Jersey Movin' Van
Sure, I see your point, but look very closely at what Jesus says in your quote in verse 47.
"Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love."
Which came first - forgiveness or the display of love? In Jesus' statement, forgiveness preceeds display of love. We see the display of love, and the statement Jesus makes in verse 48 is, to me, a public proclamation and word of assurance that the forgiveness already transpired. It did not transpire as a result of the act of love, but it was the cause of the act of love. This resolves the conflict expressed several days ago by HSinON.
I think I have a basic 3-point (could it be any other way?) outline. My basic thesis is that those present at this meal don't understand.
1) They don't understand the SINNER. Here I would use some from the "Alabaster Box" song to touch on the fact that sin always costs the sinner. We pay a dreadful price in ourselves when sin has sway. Sin isn't something God tells us not to do just just because "He says so," but because sin destroys us and causes us very real harm. What sort of hell had this woman been putting herself through by her lifestyle? They didn't know. ... They also did not see this woman as an opportunity to miniter. Could they have been ministers of grace to her? What about us? Do we see "sinners" as an opportunity that God is giving us to show His grace to those in need? Whatever the sin, it is destroying people's lives and we, as followers of Christ, can minister healing and grace.
2) They don't understand their SITUATION. Consider the parable. One man owes five hundred (the sinful woman) and another owes fifty (the Pharisee). These two have one thing in common - both are unable to pay (verse 42). They compared themselves to the woman. When we compare ourselves to other people, we will never understand the situation. When we compare ourselves to Jesus, we gain in understanding. Isaiah pronounced woes on the sinful people of Israel in Isaiah 5, but when he saw God in chapter 6, he said, "Woe is ME!" We need to see that we are also sinners and are unable to pay the debt.
3) They don't understand the SAVIOR. This is the One Who touches lepers and AIDS victims. This is the One Who receives sinners and pimps. This is the One who sees dead people (whether literally or figuratively; see 7:11-16) and raises them to life. This is the One Who finds the one lost sheep - the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many. Does the church understand? Are we a haven for saints, or a hospital for sinners? Do we have greater joy when a prospective Sunday school teacher joins the church, or when a struggling alcoholic joins? Which gives greater joy?
Jesus' call to grace is not easy, but it is required.
JG in WI
National Holiday v. Religious Holiday conflict: I do not make the national holiday the main focus of the day, but I always include prayers for veterans in November, families of those who've lost lives and those serving in dangerous places in May, and thanks for freedom and petitions for freedom in not-so-free countries in July. Just as I include prayers for mothers and prayers for fathers on Mothers and Father's days. It's ok to recognize our national holidays and I also understand the reticence to do so; there's a fine line between recognizing those days and people involved and deifying the people or the causes. To be all Dr. Phil about it, "do we want to be right, or do we want to get along with each other?" Our truth is not ALWAYS God's truth.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch ...
Paulo and Movin' Van - that's where my thoughts are headed this week, too. I've observed in real life that those who've really "been there" have a deeply-demonstrative expression of love for Christ and I've often wondered if the degree to which we show and vow devotion to Christ is the degree to which we know forgiveness. I think of a woman named Karen, for example. She was into witchcraft and the occult and claims she even levitated and such. Her cup is still running over and over and over ... And she also is wary of anything resembling the occult - including not allowing her son to go with us on a field trip to a museum that is set up in floor patters like the Egyptian pyramids, and that has many mummies. She believes Satan can get a toehold through these pagan-ritual-inspired architectural set-up (Michael Graves), or through the artifacts themselves. I personally don't believe it, but can understand her nervousness. And we won't even talk about Harry Potter!
I think, on the other hand, of Simon the host. Confident in his salvation, and indicative of many in our churches. Perhaps never having "been there" waking up drunk in a ditch, or whatever. It's hard to understand someone's passion when we've not personally experienced such. I recall another woman, Dee, who said, "I've been a Methodist my whole life but never really thought of why." If we've been brought up that way, that's good! If we never know why we're Methodist or Baptist, or Episcopalian or Catholic, or even Christian in the first place (other than it being the right thing to do), then how passionate can that really be?
And I realize this is judgmental.
Sally in GA - who's partially been there!!! and is, in many ways, still "there."
Sally in GA
I cannot say I have been where Karen has been, but I do know the neighborhood and can identify both with her overflowing joy and her nervousness about some of these occult-related things. May God be praised forever for her deliverance from them.
JG in WI
Wait a minute, here!
He forgave her sins AFTER her show of thankfulness. When she came into the house, she was still a sinner.
duhhh.... I'm having a "blonde" week. (my folks tell me I'm too young for "senior moments," so I call them "blonde moments.") Like I said earlier, I need a vacation! And a vacation that's not an obligation to my family or my inlaws.
Anyways, this casts a different light... Maybe (conjecture here) she recognized Jesus as being able to forgive sins BECAUSE she was a sinner and knew it?
too embarrassed to sign my name
Hello, all! It has been interesting reading all of your comments on the passage. I'm interested in focusing on "faith." Douglas John Hall has a really good short essay on the meaning of faith (you can find it through "The Text this Week" website) where he stresses that faith is not belief, it is trust. So that led me to thinking about whether we simply claim to believe, or whether we live as those who trust in God. I remember watching a video series in which a woman reflected on how her reading of this passage had changed. Previously, she had identified with Simon, embarassed by this woman who was crashing the party and interfering with his ability to host Jesus. Later, she recognized that the woman in the passage was willing to embarass/humiliate herself in order to come to Jesus. The woman in the video had an "aha" moment where she questioned whether she could let go of caring so much about what others thought of her, and be unembarassed about relying on Jesus. I think this tack on the passage will be helpful in my context, as one of the churches is filled with folk who are not at all comfortable with speaking about their faith, who have not been encouraged to seek depth in their relationship with God, etc. Good "churchy" folk who leave their religion to Sunday morning. So for them, I think the challenge and the grace is in this passage about the transformative love and forgiveness that Christ offers. Any thoughts?
Erin in MB
Hence: for this reason, from this point on, from now. (Webster's)
Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; HENCE she has shown great love.
1) her sins were forgiven
2) she showed great love
Her act of love was in response to (what she at least believed to be) Jesus' forgiveness of her.
Real or imagined, it changed her sense of self and of her place in God's Kingdom. Ordinarily, she might not perform this bold act, but when she perceived she was a loved and redeemed woman (as opposed to continuing to be a used and sinful woman) she cared little for what anyone said and expressed her unabashed thanks and praise to Jesus.
No matter why Jesus was in that house, no matter how the woman got there, this remains the focus of this text to me. It's back to the receiving forgiveness before asking for it, before realizing need for it, and going out to honor Christ by our own acts of forgiving love.
KHC
Dear PC
Thank you for your kind-hearted jab and your genuine concern for our congregations's financail situation. My suggestion was if one flag, then all. We have no intention of purchasing flags, but your suggestion is a good one.
The last war we fought for our freedom was the War of revolution. The following wars were fought to enforce our choice of international partners (i.e. a Hilter Eastern europe or a Stalinist Eastern Europe). So let us not confuse the issues.
The current war has nothing to do with our freedom except that some have less due to the patriot act. As all know, the responsible parties for 9-11 come from and were finaced by a different state that the one we occupy. But politics and the oil business make strange bedfellows.
Drink up the Pepto my friend, drink up.
Pr. del in Ia
JG in WI: I am embarrassed to admit it, but I have little love for three-point alliterative sermons. But I think yours is so RIGHT ON that it has made me change my mind.
LF
JG in WI: That would preach well, Amen! Very Biblical! (I will steal your outline if I ever need to preach this passahe. <evil grin>)
KHC: I am going to push your envelope a bit (not to challenge your point, just for clarification). Are you saying that we can "receive forgiveness BEFORE asking and realizing need for it", not "receive forgiveness WITHOUT asking and realizing need for it". Right? (In my congregation, I would probably state that so that they won't hear me differently).
I think sometimes we may be warpped up too much in the mechanic (of whether a definable confession preceed forgiveness or not, or whether forgiveness was a definite moment in time or not, etc.) and forget that things may not be that precised. But in general, the Spirit of God who moved us to know that we are a sinner, would also forgive our sins.
Coho. Midway City.
Coho, I guess the best I can clarify is to say that I believe forgiveness is an automatic thing when it is from God/Jesus. We can only acknowledge or not acknowledge that we have been forgiven, whatever choice we make, it comes after the fact of being forgiven. This woman chose to receive the gift of forgiveness, (she believed she had been set free from some sin) and she responded with a great outpouring of thanks. Some people choose to not receive the gift, and therefore get no benefit from the act of God's forgiveness and continue to live
without that sense of redemption. Therefore, God
gets nothing from them in return, and the relationship takes a hit. When we DO choose to acknowledge we have been forgiven, it changes who we are, even momentarily, and the relationship with God is cemented. He gave, we received, we gave thanks, we turn that love into love of neighbor.
Everybody wins, especially Jesus who is the whole
focus of this entire scenario.
When we pray our weekly Prayer of Confession in church, I write those with the idea that God already knows about these sins, has already chosen to forgive us for them, and we go through this ritual for the purpose of acknowledging that our sins are forgiven (Assurance of Pardon, not Hope of Pardon). I'm convinced we would still be forgiven as a church body if we omitted this prayer. After we do all this, we get on with the rest of the service, thanking and glorifying God and hearing his Word to us.
Wow, I can just imagine the onslaught of opposing posts THIS is going to bring. I'm not sure it's something we need to debate here, folks. Maybe in another venue?
KHC
Re: The American Flag in the church building.
When the flag is already present in the worship space, having been there as long as anyone can remember, the question becomes less, "Why is it there?" and more, "What does it say to remove it?"
Many see the presence of the flag as a symbol of thanksgiving to the persons who served God and country within the armed forces. When seen in this light, to remove it says, "We no longer appreciate the service of those who fought (fight)."
I would rather we could uplift and uphold our people who serve in all walks of life (not only the armed forces) without needing additional symbols, but this one is there, and not a battle I need to fight.
If you choose to remove a flag that is already part of the worship space, I would suggest broaching the issue outside sermon time, with education, care, and compassion... and be willing to lose time and again before people come around to your understanding that the flag is divisive when seen in the light of God loving the whole world and not just one nation.
The flag is promoted and advertised as a symbol of unity, for these "united" states. The eyes of most are not big enough to see beyond that picture of unity.
..
On Pentecost, I did risk wondering "Why so many choose to worship their country rather than their God on this Memorial Day Weekend," but softened it with a spoken expectation that they will be back next week!
God bless you all in your ministry.
Michelle
Dear hinwomyn in Pa, My thoughts and prayers are with you, my sister in the faith. I can feel some of your pain and your cry for help in your posting. My advice to you is not to compare the two congregations. Your pain is too new. This won't glorify the Lord. More and more I hear of clergywomen's horror stories of some church in which they have served. I, too, served in a church for 2 years, and the governing body of the church made my resignation immediate. There was no closure for the congregation or me. I lived in a church-owned home, so still lived in the community another 2 months. I just had my first year anniversity in the new congregation I serve. Recently, I alluded to a dark patch of time, when the Lord was with me. I haven't ever made comparisons with the two congregations in a sermon. It isn't appropriate to speak poorly of another congregation from the pulpit, even if Satan has been present there. If we do, our current congregation may wonder if we'll speak against them. It's definitetly not grounds for trust, and isn't a pastoral thing to do. I hope you're under the care of a compassionate counselor. During the difficult I experienced, my counselor, mentor, and lectionary prayer group helped to save my live. (not that I contemplated taking it, but experienced some time in the pit). Please take time to heal. Find someone outside of the church in which you can confide. May God bless you in this new opportunity for ministry. Oh yes, and I did a lot of introspection. I have learned from mistakes, but none of them deserved congregational abuse of the pastor. Your sister in Christ, PastorLaura in OH
No debate needed. At least from me.
I just seek to understand your understanding better. After all, there are biblical supports for that position right from the text as well, (Jesus said, "A certain creditor had TWO debtors... When they could not pay, he canceled the debts for BOTH of them...") Jesus was trying to help Simon to *be aware* of his SITUATION as a SINNER before the SAVIOR? (I borrow that from JG in WI's sermon there). The woman was certainly aware of her situation as a sinner before God, and therefore responded to Jesus in such a way.
But to emphasize this even more, I am not even sure if the woman had any particular awareness that her sins were forgiven or not, prior from stepping in that encounter with Jesus.
My (ahem) speculative imagination is this: This ill-reputed woman came to a realization that Rabbi Jesus is not like any other Rabbi ("having learned"). From what Jesus taught in public (as Luke recorded so far in 6:20-49), (and perhaps from Jesus' life style) she came to a speculation that Rabbi Jesus would accept sinners like her. [Now, this is a more speculative part,] Anyone who encounters God will be torn between his love and his holiness, since the woman was "having learned" about Jesus enough, she also knew that (even from the end of Luke discourse above), "No good tree bears bad fruit," and you don't just call him "Lord, Lord" and not do what He say. I would ventured to think that she specifically "having obtained" the alabaster jar of ointment to signified the tool of her trade, [IVP Background Commentary agreed w/ me on this], and pouring them out all at Jesus feet to indicate her love for Him, her willingness to call him "Lord". At the banquet, the Pharisee was well-to-do, so he had servants posted at the entrance, but as religious people, he also followed the custom of allowing the poor in [IVP, ibid.] She came in, eyes fixing on Jesus, while completely aware of the stares from people, the whispers from the surrounding. "Having stood" there at the feet of Jesus, she felt increasingly uncomforted. She was out of place. All other women had cover for their heads, and here she stood bareheaded, a sign of promiscuousity. Overcome with emotion, she broke down at Jesus feet. He would be the only one who accepted her in this world, this holy man would be the only one who not condemning her, he knew what she'd been through, and he is allowing her to touch him, to kiss his feet, to anoint his feet with perfume, to wipe them off with her hair...
She vaguely remembers the exact conversation took place between the Rabbi Simon and Rabbi Jesus. The only thing she remembers was Rabbi Jesus at the end look straight into her eyes, and then He pronounced, "Your sins have been forgiven!" (She heard the murmurs from the guests, but didn't really care what was the big deal about [she was marginally religious, remember?]) Then with a gesture, Jesus bid her farewell "Your faith has saved you, go in peace". She walked out; her life would never be the same again. I suspected that she could be found among the "many others" women supporters of Jesus at Luke 8:1-3. But of course, that would just be my speculation.
Thank you all for a great study - boy, I wish I preach this week. There are so many broken people in my congregation who could relate to this woman.
Coho, Midway City.
