• Home
• Worship
  • Worship Schedule
• Sermons
• Music
  • Choirs
  • Music List
  • Organs
  • Scholarships
  • Organ Recitals
  • Cathedral Music
• Cathedral Community
  • Cathedral News
• Events
  • Event Information
  • Book Your Event
• Weddings
• Remembrance and Celebration
• Cathedral Features
  • The Cathedral
  • St Mary's
  • St Stephen's
  • Marsden Chapel
• Links
• Contacts and People

Cathedral Eucharist Sermon preached by The Venerable Howard Leigh – Precentor
13th June 2010, Eleventh Sunday in Ordinary Time
Readings: 1 Kings 21:1-10; Galatians 2:15-21; Luke 7:36-8:3

Hospitality is a cardinal virtue in Middle Eastern culture. The belief that one is obligated to treat a stranger with honour and kindness has transcended the vicissitudes of religion, ethnicity, and empire for millennia. A Jew living in the first century would understand hospitality both from the perspective of their faith and through the Hellenic culture of their Roman occupiers. From the Hebrew Scriptures they would know the example of Abraham and Sarah at the Oaks of Mamre as well as the dictates of the law and prophets. From Roman society they would understand hospitality as a civic virtue. For those wealthy enough to host lavish meals for the entire community, communal hospitality reinforced the social esteem of the host.
In the gospel reading a Pharisee named Simon invites Jesus to such a meal. At some point during the meal, a woman approaches Jesus with an alabaster jar while he is dining at Simon’s table. While weeping she gets down on her knees and washes Jesus’ feet with her tears. She then unclasps her hair and uses it to dry his feet before anointing them with oil from her jar. In tending to Jesus in this way she has broken several social rules. Meals of this kind were viewed as public events in which all classes of people could attend. However, those not explicitly invited were expected to remain at the periphery with the understanding that the host would share leftovers with them at the conclusion of the meal. In approaching Jesus she had transgressed the understood limits of hospitality between social classes. In addition, by using the oil, drying him with unclasped hair, and even simply touching his feet, her actions could have been interpreted as erotic behaviour. The combination of these faux pas incenses Simon, as the breakdown of social customs reflects poorly upon him as the host. In a recognizably human moment he shifts blame onto Jesus. If Jesus were truly a prophet, Simon thinks to himself, he would have known who this was and put a stop to this spectacle.
Jesus responds to Simon’s thoughts with a question rather than a rebuke. He asks the Pharisee if two people who could not pay their debts had them forgiven, who would love the creditor more, the person who owes the equivalent of fifty days wages or the person who owes nearly two years wages? At first it appears that Simon answers the question correctly; it is the person who owed more. However, his response does not indicate that he understands the nature of Jesus’ question. Jesus measures the actions of the debtors in a specific manner.
It is not based simply upon gratitude but on love. This fundamentally alters the dynamic of the relationship between the debtor and the forgiven. The love proclaimed by Jesus throughout Luke shatters the boundaries of what is legally and socially required. Jesus neither offered nor sought what was right and proper; he offered and sought authentic, engaged, and passionate love. Like the woman at the home of the Pharisee, he was met at nearly every turn with resistance and rebuke by social, religious, and political elites.
According to custom, Simon was not required to offer Jesus water to cleanse his feet or to anoint him with oil. Nor was he obligated to express affection for his guest. However, the actions of the woman revealed the cold minimalism of his hospitality. She was fully absorbed in caring for Jesus. Her focus upon him was lavish and deeply felt. It was not born out of obligation but a commitment to the one who liberated her. In creating a scene, she put in stark relief Simon’s lack of care for his guest. The theological implications of the woman’s actions are clear and damning to Simon. She has provided an image of love that cannot be limited to what is proper. In doing so, she has committed an act of grace by demonstrating the authentic love of Jesus in the presence of those who marginalize her.
It is easy for us to simply use this passage as a call to serve others, however at its heart is the theology of hospitality. Here at the Cathedral we like to pride ourselves on our ministry of hospitality. Maybe we need to ask ourselves the questions: do we offer hospitality on our terms or do we see this ministry as open ended where we meet the needs of others with graciousness and sensitivity? Are we willing to go beyond what is required, and see hospitality as an expression of abundant generosity?
In a world in which the woman in today’s gospel is understood to have little to offer those who reject her as ‘not being one of us’, she provides her testimony to the grace of God. In doing so, Jesus is richly and lavishly honoured in a social setting where he is otherwise met with scepticism and rejection.
The sobering reality for all of us in this lesson is that the one whom the host would send away is the only person genuinely engaging in loving hospitality!