THEOLOGICAL AMNESIA
Katherine Dill – no relation to our own Kevin Dill – was a woman in my first church who was well into her eighties by the time I knew her. Katherine Dill was one of the greatest teachers I ever had. Some of you may have heard me say, “The most spiritual people I have ever known tend to be women in their eighties.” Katherine Dill is one of the reasons why.
Katherine had a husband named Jack who was in poor health so I went to see the two of them often. It seemed like every time I went to see them, Jack was laying on the couch taking a nap. When I came in the door, Jack would sit up on the couch, Katherine would sit in a chair on the side of the room, and I would sit directly across from Jack. Jack would tell these old stories that Katherine had probably heard a hundred times before, but she was on the edge of her seat just the same. When Jack would falter and fail to finish the story he was telling, Katherine would finish the story for him. Like I said, she’d probably heard those stories a hundred times before, but still, she was on the edge of her seat. And Jack never seemed to mind when Katherine finished a story for him either. It was almost as if the two of them had become one person.
It was from Jack and Katherine Dill that I learned what marriage is really meant to be. Jack and Katherine had been married for 63 years and in the course of those 63 years the two had indeed become one. I learned that when the Bible says that the two shall become one in marriage, that doesn’t happen overnight. It happens after many years of love, and hard work, and a word that isn’t spoken very much anymore. That other word is sacrifice. The two become one in marriage after many years of love and hard work and sacrifice.
Katherine said to me on numerous occasions, “I just want you to know that I’m praying for you.” Think about how that must have felt to me. Imagine someone you respect and admire saying to you, “I just want you to know that I’m praying for you.” It gave me a sense of peace and contentment, and I’m sure it contributed in large measure to any success I might have had in that church. It happened because Katherine was praying for me.
Of course, I’d had people say that they were praying for me before. It used to happen a lot in seminary. Whenever you’d get into a theological disagreement with someone in seminary and they’d be totally frustrated with you, they’d say, “I’ll pray for you!” What they were really saying is that they’d pray for you to get God to make you agree with their way of thinking. In that situation I wanted to respond, “No! Don’t pray for me! I don’t want God to make me think like you!” Yet when Katherine Dill said to me, “I just want you to know that I’m praying for you,” it was something else entirely.
After Jack died, I went to see Katherine as often as I could. Occasionally the subject of eternal life would come up. When Katherine would wonder if she was worthy of eternal life, I’d say to her, “Katherine, what are you talking about? If anyone’s going to get into heaven, it’s you.” To which Katherine would reply, “Oh, I don’t know. I’m just such a sinner!”
That was the final lesson Katherine taught me. She taught me that the most deeply spiritual people in the world have the most pervasive sense of their own depravity. In other words, the people who seem to us to be the closest to God are the ones who are most keenly aware of how far away from him they really are.
John Calvin once wrote in his epic theological treatise, Institutes of the Christian Religion, “Without knowledge of self, there is no knowledge of God.” Thus, knowledge of God begins with knowledge of self, and knowledge of self begins with the recognition of one’s own sinfulness; with the recognition of one’s dire need of the grace of God in Christ. In other words, we have to see ourselves for who and what we really are before we can even begin to comprehend God, let alone draw near to him.
Truth be told, that was Simon the Pharisee’s problem in the passage we read from the gospel according to Luke. He failed to see his own sinfulness. He was completely unaware of his own deep need for the grace of God in Christ. He was quick to point a finger at the sins of those around him, but he failed to see his own pressing need.
Our passage begins by saying, “One of the Pharisees asked Jesus to eat with him.” Now the Pharisees were a particular sect of the Jewish faith at the time of Jesus. They were deeply devoted to the Law of Moses. The word “Pharisee” stems from a Hebrew word meaning, “one who is separate.” That in itself should give you a clue as to what the Pharisees thought of themselves. The Pharisees enjoyed great prestige and would be the first ones to tell you how exclusive they really were.
Now as you know, Jesus frequently butted heads with the Pharisees. Thus, one might naturally wonder who this Pharisee was who extended a dinner invitation to Jesus, and why he extended it. Unfortunately, we have no clue as to who this Pharisee was other than the fact that his name was Simon. And as to why he extended a dinner invitation to Jesus, we can only speculate.
Some scholars suggest that Simon invited Jesus to dinner because he was an admirer of the young prophet and was sympathetic to his cause. After all, not all of the Pharisees were enemies of Jesus. Some even came to him for advice. Yet this scenario is unlikely because Simon failed to perform some basic courtesies to Jesus that we’ll talk about momentarily. Others suggest that Simon invited Jesus to dinner with the intention of enticing him into some word or action that might be used against him in a Jewish court of law. This scenario, too, is unlikely because, as we see in verse 40, Simon actually calls Jesus “Teacher,” or “Rabbi.” He must have had at least some respect for Jesus.
Other scholars suggest that Simon was just a collector of celebrities. You know, maybe Simon was a “name dropper.” He liked having important people at his house. Actually, this is a very plausible reason for Simon’s invitation. Perhaps Simon was a man who was only trying to patronize Jesus. It helps to explain the omission of the customary courtesies of the day that Simon failed to extend to Jesus.
What were those customary courtesies of the day? Two thousand years ago, when an important guest entered a house, there were three things that were always done. First, the host would place his hand on the shoulder of the guest and kiss him on the cheek. It was what they called “the kiss of peace.” Second, most roads in those days were only dust tracks, and shoes in those days were leather soles held in place by straps. Cool water was supposed to be poured on the guest’s feet to cleanse and comfort them. And finally, either a pinch of sweet-smelling incense was burned, or a drop of rose oil was placed on the head of the guest. These were the things that good manners dictated, yet in this case, not one of them was done.
As our story progresses, we see that a woman of the city came to Jesus. Our passage indicates that this woman was a sinner, which is a nice way of saying that she was likely a prostitute. This woman began to wash Jesus’ feet with her tears and to anoint them with oil. There are two questions that come to mind right here. Number one, how did the woman get into this invitation-only dinner, and number two, how did she gain access to Jesus feet when he was sitting at the table?
The home of a wealthy Pharisee like Simon would have had a large open courtyard surrounded by a wall. Often these courtyards had gardens and fountains, and in warm weather, meals were eaten there. It was the custom that when a Rabbi was at a meal in such a house, all kinds of people came in and they were quite free to do so. They came to listen to the wisdom that fell from his lips. That explains how the woman got into the invitation-only party.
How did she gain access to Jesus’ feet when he was sitting at the table? In those days, people didn’t actually sit at tables like we do today. They reclined on their sides beside the table. They planted their left arms on a couch and folded their legs behind them. It would have been a difficult time to be left-handed, don’t you think? In any case, Jesus’ feet would have been sticking out behind him. That’s how the woman gained access to Jesus’ feet.
Clearly this woman was repentant of her behavior. She must have wept bitterly – so much so that she shed enough tears to wash Jesus’ feet with her hair. Around her neck she wore, like all Jewish women at the time, a little vial of concentrated perfume. They were called alabasters and they were very expensive. She poured this ointment on Jesus’ feet, for it was all she had to offer.
By now, I suspect, this woman was creating quite a scene. Simon thought to himself, “If this man were really a prophet, he would know what kind of a woman she is.” Jesus, fully aware of what lay in Simon’s heart, posed a question to him. “Simon,” he said, “a certain creditor had two debtors: one who owed $50,000.00 and one who owed $5,000.00. When they could not pay, he forgave them both. Which of the two will love him more?” Simon wisely replied, “The one, I suppose, to whom he forgave more.” Jesus said to Simon, “You have judged rightly.”
Then turning toward the woman, Jesus said to Simon, “Do you see this woman?” Likely keeping his gaze upon her, he added: “I entered your house and you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not ceased to kiss my feet. You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven, for she loved much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little.”
Simon’s heart must have dropped to his feet at that. Jesus deftly pointed out the contrast between the two of them. Simon was conscious of no need for forgiveness and therefore felt no love in his heart. Simon’s impression of himself was that he was a good man in the sight of God. The woman was conscious of nothing but a deep-seated need for forgiveness. Since she was so overwhelmed with love for him who could give it, she found her forgiveness.
Perhaps nothing shuts a person off from God any more than self-sufficiency. The ultimate irony is that the more Godly a person is, the more conscious they are of their own depravity; the more aware they are of their own sinfulness. My friend Katherine Dill saw herself as a sinner. When the Apostle Paul spoke of sinners, he referred to himself as the foremost of sinners. St. Francis of Assisi once said, “There is nowhere a more wretched and more miserable sinner than I.” And as John Calvin said, “Without knowledge of self, there is no knowledge of God.” The denial of who and what we really are does nothing but expand the chasm that exists between us and God. It can render us loveless and it can leave us unforgiven. Such are the fruits of the self-sufficient life.
It seems as though Simon the Pharisee had a bad case of theological amnesia. Sometimes we get a bad case of theological amnesia as well. What is theological amnesia? Theological amnesia has to do with forgetting what it really means to be a Christian. Christians are sinners in desperate need of the grace of God in Christ. Theological amnesia stems from a lack of familiarity with Scripture. We need to learn to open to our Bibles again. We need to read them and recognize ourselves in its pages. For apart from Scripture, we have the capacity to rationalize our way around anything. People can literally justify their behavior in everything from little white lies to adultery.
Ladies and gentlemen, we need to learn to recognize ourselves for who and for what we are – not in accordance with the world’s standards – but in the eyes of God. We may not like what we see at first, but the grace of God perpetually gives us the chance to begin anew. May we learn to see ourselves for who and for what we really are. For that, my friends, is where forgiveness can be found, and our journey toward God begins. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment