Six Years On

As some of you may know, today marks six years since Debbie died. I wouldn't say that I have felt particularly sad today, just distracted and finding it a little hard to focus on tasks and preparation. Essentially, I have been in a slightly exaggerated version of my usual state!

I nearly put "my first wife, Debbie" in that first sentence, which illustrates the issue I have been thinking about a little bit today. When Debbie died, I was the rector of a church in Morecambe, and in the following two years, I was surrounded by people who had known Debbie, and had experienced her care, wisdom, leading worship, read her writing, laughed along with her, had  fun with Crib Services, Messy Church and more. I could talk about her to the people around me, knowing that we had those common experiences.

Debbie at her ordination as a priest 11 June 1994

A few months after moving to Beverley, I was at a meeting in York with a colleague who had known us both when we were in Nottingham. In a break, I joked with him about what Debs would have made of something that had occurred, he laughed, and I had a sudden realisation that if anyone else in the room was listening, they would have had no idea who I was talking about. On the way home, it further dawned on me that in my day-to-day routine, I met no-one who had ever met her - and that felt very strange. It also made my encounters with those who did remember even more special.

The consequence of that is that in most circumstances I now encounter, whenever I refer to quite a large period of my life, there needs to be some telling of the story, and some explanation of who Debbie is. Sometimes it is necessary to clarify that, in order to explain a situation properly. For example, I have two mothers-in-law! 

In fact, this happens for everyone to some extent. As time goes on, the community we are surrounded by changes, and fewer people remember who and what was there before, including loved ones who have died. Perhaps it is more acute in situations like mine where I have both moved and married again (especially if the new location is one where there are few connections). 

I am sure that is why, for some people, regular acts of remembrance are so important – to keep memories alive and recollections fresh of a loved one lost. For some people that is about regularly tending graves, annually placing tributes in the memorial column of a local paper, or perhaps a Facebook post. I have Debbie’s writings, her blog and her Facebook profile being available so I can ‘hear’ her voice, as well as a wealth of photographs and some video footage.

In other eras, you would need a very different approach to keep that sort of memory fresh in people’s minds. Perhaps that’s why the touch, smell and taste of bread and wine are part of communion - the central act of remembrance for Christians, which we think of especially tomorrow, Maundy Thursday.

Wednesday of Holy Week 2022

 21 After saying this Jesus was troubled in spirit, and declared, ‘Very truly, I tell you, one of you will betray me.’ ²²The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he was speaking. ²³One of his disciples—the one whom Jesus loved—was reclining next to him; ²⁴Simon Peter therefore motioned to him to ask Jesus of whom he was speaking. ²⁵So while reclining next to Jesus, he asked him, ‘Lord, who is it?’ ²⁶Jesus answered, ‘It is the one to whom I give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.’ So when he had dipped the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas son of Simon Iscariot.²⁷After he received the piece of bread, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, ‘Do quickly what you are going to do.’ ²⁸Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him. ²⁹Some thought that, because Judas had the common purse, Jesus was telling him, ‘Buy what we need for the festival’; or, that he should give something to the poor. ³⁰So, after receiving the piece of bread, he immediately went out. And it was night.

31 When he had gone out, Jesus said, ‘Now the Son of Man has been glorified, and God has been glorified in him. ³²If God has been glorified in him, God will also glorify him in himself and will glorify him at once.

 

On the 17^th May 1966, Bob Dylan was performing at the Free Trade Hall in Manchester. He had attracted some controversy, as he had moved away from his acoustic folk origins to embrace electric instruments and played an electric guitar himself. “Judas” shouts a voice from the audience in between songs. “I don’t believe you….. you’re a liar” replies Dylan before encouraging his band to play *expletive* loud.

Judas has become a term for betrayer, which has uses well beyond the Christian community. In fact, there are several Judases in the New Testament, including the brother of Jesus, a disciple referred to as Judas son of James, and 3 more feature in the Book of Acts. That would seem to explain why the New Testament often refers to ‘Judas Iscariot’ or adds a comment about betrayal – to ensure we know who they are talking about.

Tragically, Judas Iscariot has been used in Christian rhetoric to support antisemitism, focusing on him being a Jewish man held responsible for Jesus’ death. (That makes the ‘Judas’ shout at the concert especially barbed, as Dylan is also Jewish.) The truth – as ever with prejudice and bigotry – is of course very different. Jesus and all of the disciples are also Jews, as are the scribes, the Pharisees the priests, much of the early church leadership, as well as the writers of the Gospels. Meanwhile, a Gentile governor sentences Jesus to death, and Gentile soldiers execute him.

However, all good stories need a villain, and Judas does more than enough to qualify for that role. John’s account of these events describes him as essentially the group’s treasurer (adding the detail that Judas stole from the purse for himself). As we heard on Monday, Judas is the one who objected to the apparent waste of perfume used in anointing Jesus’ feet, and today we heard that when Jesus gives Judas bread and he leaves, some disciples assumed it was connected to his role as keeper of the common purse.

So, can we understand anything about this act of betrayal? The accounts of Jesus’ life and ministry in the gospels give us a few clues. Mark and Matthew say he was promised money, Matthew adding that 30 pieces of silver were handed over, whereas Luke and John both describe Satan as being the motivator for the betrayal. I imagine some people might say the two are closely related! Judas leaves the Last Supper and eventually brings back a force to arrest Jesus at Gethsemane where he seems to know that Jesus would be praying. Famously a kiss is recorded as the signal that identifies Jesus, Matthew adding the detail that Jesus calls him “friend”.

Afterwards, Matthew records Judas committing suicide and tells us he repented and gave the money back; Luke in the book of Acts has a more grisly version and makes no suggestion of repentance.

So what was Judas doing? Perhaps he was simply a thief who didn’t really ever properly understand who Jesus was – he is only ever recorded as called Jesus “Rabbi”, not “Lord”. Some have speculated that he was sympathetic to the freedom fighting Zealots, hoping for Jesus to be a figurehead for a popular uprising (like his namesake Judas Maccabeus had led nearly 200 years earlier) If that was the case, we can only imagine his horror as Jesus enters Jerusalem on an ass in peace, or washes his followers’ feet. Perhaps he was more of a religious purist who found it unacceptable that Jesus was so open to “tax collectors and sinners”, to the outcasts and unclean, to lepers and Gentiles unacceptable. Finally at the meal, facing what Jesus’ love was really like, he runs out into the night.

Perhaps Judas points us to just how radical Jesus’ message was, and how Jesus refused to conform to any of the expectations that people might place on him. His revolutionary message was one of peace, not uprising; his preaching was for the lost and the outcast, not the in-crowd; his call for faithfulness was about hearts and minds, not about ritual and dogged adherence to laws and regulations.

And whenever that message is heard, whenever it confronts the norms and expectations of this world, it asks us difficult questions too. Do we want treasure on earth or in heaven? Do we want to believe and trust those with earthly power and might, or one with the power of love? Are we more interested in those who have or pursue status and standing, or are we with the Servant King?

 

 

Monday of Holy Week

 12¹ Six days before the Passover Jesus came to Bethany, the home of Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. ²There they gave a dinner for him. Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those at the table with him. ³Mary took a pound of costly perfume made of pure nard, anointed Jesus’ feet, and wiped them with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. ⁴But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (the one who was about to betray him), said, ⁵‘Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and the money given to the poor?’ ⁶(He said this not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief; he kept the common purse and used to steal what was put into it.) ⁷Jesus said, ‘Leave her alone. She bought it so that she might keep it for the day of my burial. ⁸You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me.’

9 When the great crowd of the Jews learned that he was there, they came not only because of Jesus but also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. ¹⁰So the chief priests planned to put Lazarus to death as well, ¹¹since it was on account of him that many of the Jews were deserting and were believing in Jesus.   [NRSV]

 

One of the slightly odd things about the schedule of Bible readings that we use at this time of year is that most of this passage came up as the Sunday reading on the 3^rd of April. However, that gives us an opportunity to take another look at the reading and explore some different aspects to its message. We also get verses 9-11 as a bonus.

As we saw last time, the centre piece of the reading is when Mary breaks her jar of perfume and anoints Jesus’ feet, and we considered how investing anything in worship – whether time, energy, skills or money and precious possessions makes no sense outside the context of faith. If there were no God, then the accountants (represented here by Judas – sorry if you are an accountant!) would be right. However, if all things come from God, then of His own do we give Him.

So let’s go back and get another perspective. The Gospels suggest that Mary, Martha and their brother Lazarus have been friends of Jesus since before his public ministry began. Unlike disciples (who are friends through becoming followers) they may have known each other since they were young, although that is not recorded. In the previous chapter (Jn. 11), John has reported that Lazarus has been brought back from the dead by Jesus in an extraordinary miracle.

We should remember that women were very vulnerable in that society – often essentially being the possessions of men and depending on them – so it is no surprise that the two sisters were especially distraught when Lazarus died. Not only were they suffering an acute bereavement, but their homes and livelihoods were seriously in question. They were also angry that Jesus wasn’t there. Now, following the raising of Lazarus, all has been restored.

In another incident in Luke’s gospel, Martha is described as the activist and Mary is the one who listens to Jesus (causing tension between them), so it is no surprise that Mary is the one who demonstrates her devotion to Jesus here. She has a very expensive jar of perfume, which may have effectively been an insurance policy. It was something she could sell in an emergency to get 300 denarii (a year’s wages) which could see the family through a difficult time.

Breaking the jar open and using it in this scene means that she is letting go of that potential material security. It is a picture of her saying to Jesus that she places her trust in him over the security she could derive from ‘stuff’. How often do we worry about out material security over and above our spiritual well-being? And note that it is Mary’s to give; she feels empowered to make this extravagant gift and symbol of devotion and love.

Meanwhile Judas is a complete contrast. The Gospels are never going to give him a good press, but John seems especially keen to point out all of his shortcomings – that he would betray and that he had already stolen. But here Judas objects to the valuable perfume being used in this extravagant way. But notice that use of the perfume is not his to decide, and the anointing costs him nothing. I get a sense from this scene that we have a man with little regard for women, who thinks he should decide how they should act. And I think that’s why Jesus’ first response is “leave her alone” to defend her freedom. It’s easy to decide what other people should do when we don’t have live with the consequences or pay the cost. This was Mary’s perfume, Mary’s gift, and Mary’s worship. It was none of Judas’ business.

His defence is to point out that the poor could have been fed, so Jesus responds with the much misunderstood “⁸You always have the poor with you” (John 12:8)

In fact, Jesus’ words come from the Old Testament: Deuteronomy 15:11

“There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore, I command you to be openhanded toward your fellow Israelites who are poor and needy in your land.”

The context makes it very clear that the permanent presence of the poor is not commended or in any way defined; it is a reality. This legislates for generosity and support sitting alongside rules about cancelling debts every 7 years. We should note that this is in the legal code of the Israelites, so it isn’t just a moral lesson for a minority of charitably minded people; it’s legislation demanding a response from everyone with the capacity to do so.

To me, Jesus is saying that there is an ongoing responsibility for all to be generous to the poor that will never go away, and which we have a lifetime to fulfil. Quibbling over Mary’s act of devotion misses the point: the poor are always with you, so always be generous to them.

This was Mary’s moment to show what Jesus meant to here, and furthermore the symbolism of what she did points forward to his burial in the tomb. Luke (23:56) reports that women prepared spices and perfume for the burial of Jesus’ body after he had been crucified, but the Sabbath meant there was a delay in using them, and the resurrection meant they were no longer needed. It is almost as if this moment is an anticipation and almost a substitute for that moment.

Mary is empowered – deciding to use her most precious possession and her insurance to show her trust and love for Jesus, and yet paradoxically also anticipating something that was to come. Judas tries to control her – as men frequently have – and for a range of dubious motives. That reveals his lack of understanding, his lack of grace, and perhaps some clues as to why in the end he gives up on Jesus, whereas the women will be the ones standing at the foot of the cross, staring the pain of it in the face, and tending to Jesus' body in the aftermath.