Cathedral Sermons
15th Sunday in Ordinary Time, 11th July, 2010,
Readings: Amos 7:7-17, Colossians 1:1-14, Luke 10: 25-37.
What do you understand eternal life to be?
I have a friend who is a scientist, he considers that eternal life is about him leaving a mark- through his child- on the human gene pool. I have at least one- if not many- friends who consider that eternal life is about being “where God is”. I have another friend who thinks that eternal life is a metaphor (not real) but the focus is really supposed to be on the here and now. This friend thinks that if we live life as Jesus suggests then the real experience of eternity is now.
And then there is the idea that eternal life is about the ability for loving-kindness to live on as acts of charity, mercy, justice and constancy. These have the capacity to transform lives and the experience of human reality in such enduringly powerful ways, that the action and the person live on in memory. Or the idea that the energy which holds all of the universe, (and each person, and each discrete object) together- that energy-(which could be called quantum energy) is actually what we can humanly only experience and describe as love. And therefore eternal life is about finding identity in that energy of love.
Well today’s gospel is about eternal life- what do you understand eternal life to be?
The Gospel passage is familiar to us and therefore dangerous, as we may take its meaning for granted. In preparing this I have drawn on Kenneth Bailey’s book Through Peasant Eyes in order to put this wonderful story in its cultural milieu. This passage is a parable which Luke has enclosed in a dialogue. The dialogue takes place between a lawyer and Jesus…so this gives us a “heads up”. We may be about to hear something about how we could get distracted by issues of refined argument when we consider this matter of inheriting eternal life. Recognizing this, Jesus points him at the Law and asks what he knows from there that might inform the discussion…he places the answer in the lawyer’s mouth. The lawyer gives a perfect answer and Jesus congratulates him and says do this and you will live. So point one: eternal life is about doing something rather than thinking or discussing something. This doesn’t satisfy the lawyer. He wasn’t aiming just for a perfect understanding, he wants perfect assurance that he will get everything. Point two: eternal life is not earned by you or I doing something, rather it is given to us after we do something, because of God’s love rather than our compliance or action.
Then we come to the parable itself:
The road to Jericho from Jerusalem is 17 miles in length, desert environment, has long straight stretches, and a gentle slope, this means that there is an excellent view of travelers on the road. It was regarded as dangerous as it was known to have bandits. A listener from that time on hearing the story would think immediately that any traveler on the road can see someone a long way off and would be likely to pay attention to every detail for their own safety. So these travelers probably all see one another, and are influenced by one another. (They may even have seen the bandit attack take place.) Their clothing indicates social class, and cultural background as well as religion. So the idea of identity and visibility brings us to point three regarding eternal life: are we influenced by others when we decide what to do?
The audience from this region is really aware of the social mores implicit in the story. The man is stripped of all social identifiers- his clothing and the ability to speak. Therefore these travelers cannot define his status and his community connection. He may be poor or wealthy, he may be a Jew or a Gentile, may be a local person or a traveler.
The priest comes first. He is supposed to set an example, supposed to know Torah and oral law. His conduct is proscribed. Although we aren’t told, the audience would assume that he definitely has a horse or a donkey for this trip. Therefore he could transport an unconscious man. He focuses on ritual purity, treats the wounded man as a corpse and leaves four cubits distance as he passes by. This allows him to avoid personal humiliation and loss of status.
What does the Levite do? He copies the priest. He may or may not have had a horse or donkey, but he steers clear of trouble. Now another theme joins the story with the arrival of the Samaritan. Because Samaritans were despised in this society and each week declarations were read in the synagogues stating that Samaritans were not to inherit eternal life. Jesus takes the risky path of presenting the most hated member of society as presenting a better role model than the religious elite.
In drawing near to the unidentified, battered human, the Samaritan also risks ritual contamination. As a traveler with goods, animals and money he is an absolute target for the robbers. So not only do we hear of one who lays religious and physical wellbeing on the line, the one who is used as the example is the most despised member of society. Finally by telling the inn keeper that he will return he lays himself open to “eye for an eye” vengeance. The wounded man’s family may choose to wait for his return to extract retribution when they hear of the injury to their family member.
Here then we have the answer to the lawyer’s desire to justify himself:
1. We are to act rather than discuss.
2. We cannot earn this eternal life, it is a gift.
3. We are to chart our own course, rather than be influenced by those who protect status and avoid humiliation.
4. Sometimes we will risk reputation, physical safety, and ongoing repercussions after the event.
However Jesus tells us that this will mean that we experience eternal life. What does eternal life mean for you? Is it possible that if we were to live like this, then we would experience that presence of love and it could pour out of us and change the world…and that change could last for all eternity.