Lent 5, Year A (2020)

Ezekiel 37: 1–14 / Psalm 130 / John 11: 1–45

This is the homily provided to the members of St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania by Fr. Gene Tucker on Sunday, March 29, 2020. ( This homily was not delivered in person. Instead, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it was provided to the St. John’s congregation via electronic means and via the postal system. It is also being shared with a wider audience via my sermon blog. -- Fr. Tucker.)

“ONE MORE MIRACLE BEFORE THE MIRACLE-OF-MIRACLES”

(Homily text:  John 11: 1–45)

An important aspect of studying any scriptural text is the necessity of reading it in the context of what precedes it, and what follows it. Another sense of the importance of a text can be found in its overall place in the theological framework of the writer.

This second sense is central to understanding John’s placement of the raising of Lazarus in his Gospel narrative.

In the Fourth Gospel, John concludes Jesus’ earthly ministry by relating the account of Lazarus’ raising. It is, indeed, the last of the Lord’s miracles before that great and final miracle, His rising from the dead on Easter Sunday morning. So, in a very real sense, Jesus’ raising of Lazarus presages His own rising. Put another way, what we are to learn from the Lord’s ability to bring Lazarus back from the dead is that the Lord possesses power over death itself. We have already noted this power in John’s narrative: One chapter earlier in John’s account, we read the following statement: The Lord says, “No one takes it (my life) from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This charge I have received from my Father.” (English Standard Version)

Some of the details about Lazarus’ resurrection are important to understanding the magnitude of Jesus’ miracle:

Jesus’ delay:  Notice in the text that Jesus delays coming to Bethany. He is told that Lazarus is ill, but He delays coming for two days (John 11: 6).

Lazarus’ condition: Jesus leads the disciples into a full understanding that Lazarus has died. At first, Jesus tells them that Lazarus has “fallen asleep”. (Recall that the use of the word “asleep” in the Scriptures is often used to indicate death.) The disciples say that, if he has fallen asleep, he will recover. But then Jesus bluntly tells them that Lazarus has died.

Jesus’ delay of two days in coming to Bethany means that Lazarus has been in the tomb for four days. When the Lord arrives at the tomb, Lazarus’ sister Martha tells the Lord that, by this time, there will be the stench of death, an indicator that Lazarus is dead. (11: 39b) At this juncture, another indicator that Lazarus was truly, completely and totally dead arises, and it comes from the commonly-held attitudes of the Jews in that day, who believed that a person’s soul lingered around the body for three days, in the hopes of being reunited with it. After three days, however, the belief was that the soul departed.

We began by noting that, oftentimes, it’s important to note what events are narrated before and after a passage we are considering. In the case of today’s appointed text, we would do well to note that, beginning in verse forty six of the eleventh chapter, it is the raising of Lazarus that sets in motion the chain of events that will lead to Jesus’ death and burial. In John’s narrative, the raising of Lazarus closes off the series of miracles that demonstrate the truth that Jesus and the Father are one (See John 10: 30.) Scholars sometimes call the first eleven chapters of the Fourth Gospel the “Book of the Signs”. Then, beginning in chapter twelve through twenty one, it is followed by the “Book of the Passion”.

Application of the events narrated in Holy Scripture is the final step in our own consideration of any text. “What does this text tell me about God, what does this text tell me about God’s power, God’s plan, or God’s ability to make a difference in my life?” Those questions are one way we might seek to apply the lessons of Scripture to our lives. After all, we don’t read Holy Scripture in the same way we might read the daily newspaper. We read Scripture so as to inform ourselves about the nature of the God who loves us, and whom we love in return.

What might be the lesson for us, then, in the raising of Lazarus?

Perhaps this:  The Lord’s voice is heard even by the dead. Therefore, this Jesus, who rose from the dead on Easter Sunday morning, possesses all power, yes, over life, but also certainly over death, and over everything in between. The Lord’s power has the ability to see us through every trouble, every challenge, everything that might attempt to come between us and God. Does this mean that we will never have challenges and troubles in this life? Emphatically, we must say “No”!, troubles, trials, tribulations and challenges will come. But whatever may come, we do know that our Lord Jesus Christ stands alongside us, and that nothing can separate us from the love of God, made known in Christ Jesus. (See Romans 8: 35)

AMEN.      

Lent 4, Year A (2020)

I Samuel 16: 1–13 / Psalm 23 / John 9: 1–41

This is the homily provided for the people of St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, by Fr. Gene Tucker, for Sunday, March 22, 2020.

 (An introductory note: This homily was not delivered as part of our Sunday morning worship, because St. John’s is currently closed due to the COVID–19 viral outbreak. Instead, it was provided via electronic means, and in hard copy to those without email.)

“SEEING BAD OR SEEING GOOD”

(Homily text: John 9: 1-41)

Again this Sunday, as was the case last Sunday, we are blessed to have an appointed Gospel text from the Fourth Gospel, the account of Jesus’ life, ministry, passion, death and resurrection provided to us by John. (And, looking ahead, next Sunday’s Gospel text is also appointed from John, the account of the raising of Lazarus, from chapter eleven.)

This Sunday’s text recounts the healing of a man born blind. (It’s important to note that this Sunday’s text is a lengthy one, compared to the length of most of our Sunday Gospel texts, as was last Sunday’s, but the reason for the length is that it’s important to capture the entire account of the original event.)

Two main themes emerge from the text, and they have to do with the reaction of the Jewish onlookers and the Pharisees to the man’s condition, on the one hand, and to the great and good thing that Jesus did, on the other. Put another way, the challenge that these two perspectives place before us is this:  Do we follow the example of the Pharisees and only see the bad aspects of a situation, or do we see the great and good things that God does?

We may begin our examination of the text by looking at the attitude of God’s people in the time of our Lord’s earthly ministry. In the account, the first evidence of the attitude is found in the comments of Jesus’ disciples, who ask, “Who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” The idea that the man himself, and maybe as his parents, might be responsible for the man’s condition, stems from the Ten Commandments, where God states that he will “visit the sins of the fathers on their children to the third and fourth generations.” (Exodus 20: 4b) (As we shall shortly see, the Pharisees also enunciate a similar perspective.)

The disciples’ question arises from ideas and attitudes that were common among God’s people in that day and time. The supposition was that, if a person was healthy and well-to-do, then they must have been blessed by God for adhering faithfully to the commandments of God as they are found in the Law of Moses. It naturally follows, then, that the reverse is also true: If a person is sickly, or poor, or is afflicted by some debilitating condition (such as blindness), then the cause must surely be some besetting sin.

As the narrative unfolds, the Pharisees, who have come upon the scene, are concerned only with two things: 1. That Jesus healed the man on the Sabbath day; and 2. That the man (or his parents) must surely be notorious sinners.

Jumping ahead to the end of the narrative, the Pharisees’ blindness (in not being able to see the good in what had happened, but only the bad) is condemned. To them, Jesus says, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt, but because you say, ‘We see’, your guilt remains.”

Being able to see, especially in the Fourth Gospel, but also in Scripture as a whole, has much more to do with being able to see spiritually. The idea does include the physical ability to see, but there is a deeper meaning, having to do with spiritual acuity and perception. It is on this aspect of the meaning of the word “to see” that the Pharisees are condemned as being blind.

You and I, as we noted a moment ago, are faced with a choice: We can see the bad in a situation and bemoan its effects, even as we search for some reason for the predicament. Or, we can choose to see God at work in a situation, rejoicing that God’s kingdom is breaking into the world.

We live in a world that offers plenty of bad things to be concerned about. In so many ways, it seems as though God’s kingdom is light years away from coming into its fullness. (Think of our current situation as the spread of the coronavirus widens and threatens to upend peoples’ lives….that’s just one example.)

But if we can see God at work, even in the worst possible circumstances, then we can see that God’s power to create and to recreate can incite in us a desire to work alongside God’s plans to being the kingdom into being, bit by bit, in the here and now. As Jesus noted, at times, a situation exists for the very purpose of allowing God to demonstrate His power. (See John 9: 3.)

That’s our charge and our mandate as Christians, to assist God in making the kingdom’s arrival a reality. May the Holy Spirit guide us, enable us, empower us, for the work of ministry.

AMEN.

Lent 3, Year A (2020)

Exodus 17: 1–7 / Psalm 95 / Romans 5: 1–11 / John 4: 5–42

This is the homily given at St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, by Fr. Gene Tucker on Sunday, March 15, 2020.

 “IS ANYONE BEYOND GOD’S ABILITIES?”

(Homily text: John 4: 5-42)

We are blessed this morning to hear and consider the account of Jesus’ interaction and conversation with a woman at a well in Samaria. (Indeed, we are also blessed to be able to spend some more time in John’s Gospel account…last week, recall that we heard John’s account of the Lord’s encounter with Nicodemus,)

As we hear how the conversation unfolds between this unnamed woman and the Lord, a clear message leaps off of the page: “No one is beyond God’s ability to love.” To this comment we might add another: “God loves and is concerned with everyone, not just with some people and not others.”

Jesus’ actions toward the Samaritan woman bear out this truth. We see it clearly as we consider how Jesus breached the conventions of His own day in His interactions with the woman. We can summarize the walls that came tumbling down by recounting the following:

Jews and Samaritans:  In our Lord’s day, Jews looked with disdain on the Samaritans. The history between these two groups was marked by armed conflict (about 150 years before Jesus’ birth). Furthermore, the Samaritans were regarded by Jews as belonging to a substandard racial group because the Samaritans were the descendants of those who had remained after the conquest of the Northern Kingdom of Israel in 722 BC at the hands of the invading Assyrians, who had intermarried with other peoples who were resettled into the area after the fall of the Northern Kingdom. To add to the problem, the Samaritans possessed a version of the five books of Moses, but the Samaritan version differed from that of the Jews, so that, too, was reason for suspicion. Finally, the Samaritans regarded Mount Gerazim as being the holy mountain. This is a facet of the interchange between Jesus and the woman in our account this morning, for she asks the Lord to resolve the dispute about where, exactly, is the place where people ought to focus their attention on God.

Many pious Jews in our Lord’s day would have gone to extraordinary means to avoid going through Samaria if they had occasion to have to travel from Galilee (in the north) down to Jerusalem for some of the sacred feasts. Many, perhaps most, of them would have avoided Samaria entirely by taking a route down through the Jordan River valley, or along the coastline of the Mediterranean Sea.

Women and men:  In the culture of the time, men did not interact with a woman to whom they were not related in public. The Samaritan woman is aware of this prohibition as she asks, “How is it that you, a Jew, ask of me, a Samaritan, for water?”

People with questionable life histories:  Perhaps one reason why the woman was forced to come to draw water from the well at midday was due to her life’s trajectory. Jesus informs her that He knows about her marital history, and about her current life situation. Even in Samaritan circles, having been married five times, and being in a situation of living with a man without the benefit of marriage, would have created a stigma that would have caused many in the Samaritan city to shun or avoid this woman, most likely.

Jesus breaches all these walls, walls which divide people from one another and from God. To begin with, instead of avoiding Samaria, He makes His way right through it. Furthermore, He is unafraid to engage this woman whom He did not know in conversation in public. And finally, He doesn’t mind treating the woman with care and respect, even through He knows about her life history.

Jesus’ actions with the Samaritan woman are completely consistent with His actions throughout His earthly ministry. The Jews of His day shunned those who were considered to be unclean, those who were of questionable ancestry, those who, because of their life’s history, were forever marked (in their estimation at least) as being outside of God’s care, concern and love.

You and I, by virtue of having been called by God into relationship with Him through our Lord Jesus Christ, are called to behave like Jesus did and does.

We cannot claim a special and favored status in God’s plan, for we, ourselves, were once outside, looking in on God’s love. To draw us into relationship with Him, God calls us into the waters of baptism, calling us to say “goodbye” to our old way of sin and disobedience into a new life, a new life of rebirth in the waters of baptism, into a new relationship of love with God. God’s invitation is for all people, of all racial and ethnic backgrounds, of all ages, of all past histories.

God’s invitation is a radical one, one of radical welcome. God’s invitation calls us to see how valuable and important we are in God’s estimation. God’s invitation calls us to allow the Holy Spirit to remake us into the full image of God as we see it in Jesus Christ. Truly, we can say that God calls us wherever He finds us, but He never leaves us there.

AMEN.

Lent 2, Year A (2020)

Genesis 12: 1–4a / Psalm 121 / Romans 4: 1–5, 13–17 / John 3: 1–17

This is the homily given at St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, by Fr. Gene Tucker on Sunday March 8, 2020.

 “THE MUSIC HAPPENS BETWEEN THE NOTES”

(Homily text: John 3: 1-17)

In my early years as a student at the Eastman School of Music in Rochester, New York, I sang in a small ensemble of five singers, two sopranos, an alto, a tenor (me) and a bass. The group was organized by a graduate student whom we will call “Jason” (not his real name). Jason conducted the group, and he was a baritone.

Jason was a colorful guy: He drove all old Porsche sports car convertible (never mind that it was badly rusted out from having been driven in New York winters through lots of salt), which sat up on blocks during the winter months. When he drove that car, he had all the accessories necessary to look the part of a man-about- town: Leather driving gloves, and snazzy clothes. It’s safe to say that Jason had all the flair of many baritones….having been a tenor, I’ve always wondered if baritones comport themselves as they do because they really wish they were tenors. But now I’m wandering off the point.

To return to Jason and his group, I’d have to say that perhaps one reason he founded the group was so that he could get some practice in conducting. (He went on after school to teach in a college.)

For all of the aspects of his unique personality, at times he would say something that was profound.

Here is one memorable thing he said to us singers:  “The music doesn’t happen on the notes, the music happens between the notes.”

I’ve never forgotten that statement.

It’s a profound statement, one which emphasizes the reality that music – as with so many things in life – is all about relationships. In the case of music, paying attention simply to the notes risks the possibility that the overall beauty of a piece of music will be missed. The grand, over-arching design of a piece will go by the wayside, if the focus is simply on the notes. Being an accomplished musician means that a person must master the business of playing or singing the notes well. But being an accomplished musician also means that a person must learn how to make the notes relate to one another.

In essence, Jesus’ conversation with the Pharisee Nicodemus falls into the category of not concentrating just on the notes, but on what happens between the notes. Put into the context of Jesus’ remarks, what Jesus is saying to Nicodemus is that he needed to stop seeing things from a purely literal point-of-view. He needed to see the relationship between God and people, for that’s the essence of what our walk of faith is all about.

Nicodemus’ outlook is most clearly seen in his comment, made in response to Jesus’ remark that he needed to be “born again”.[1] Nicodemus parrots out the commonly-held views of many of God’s people in those days, asking how it would be possible for a person to go back into their mother’s womb and be born a second time. God’s people in those days were concerned, chiefly, with the literal details of how one related to God. One example will illustrate the point: Great concern and care was lavished on things like how far a person could walk on the Sabbath day.

Nicodemus is seeing the details of life in isolation from other things in life. Not that the details aren’t important, they are. Just as in music, the way in which each note is approached is critical to the way a musical work will be performed, so, too, with life. The details of life form the building blocks for our way of seeing things, our world view.

But Nicodemus’ problem was that he couldn’t see God at work. His problem was that he couldn’t see the forest for the trees, if we may make use of another analogy.

Jesus tries to get Nicodemus to see the greater and more basic picture, to see God at work not just in the literal things one does day-by-day, but to see how those basic, everyday things fit into God’s working in a person’s life and in the world.

Fortunately, we learn later on in John’s gospel account that Nicodemus seemed to “get it”, to get that great, big picture, for Nicodemus was the one who provided the spices and anointments for Jesus’ burial.

For you and me, our need is to see the relationships that are formed when we become aware of God’s working in our lives and in the world. We need to see the music that happens between the notes.

This higher level of awareness can work itself out in numerous ways. I offer the following as a beginning point for further reflection:

Our life in the Church isn’t just about the things we do in the Church and in our worship, but our life there is meant to connect us to God at work in the world around us.

Our life in God isn’t just for our own edification and comfort, but it is for the benefit of God’s work in the world and our role in bringing the kingdom of God into being in this world and in this time and place.

Our own ideas and desires aren’t the only thing we need to be aware of. We need to be aware of God’s will for our lives and for the work that God calls us to do.

So, dear friends, the music of our life in God doesn’t happen just on the notes, that music happens between the notes when we look up and around to see God’s hand at work in many and various ways.

AMEN.

---

[1]   Jesus’ remark is often translated as “born again”, but the Greek can also be translated as “born anew”.

Lent 1, Year A (2020

Genesis 2: 15–17; 3: 1–7 / Psalm 32 / Romans 5: 12–19 /  Matthew 4: 1–11

This is the homily given at St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, by Fr. Gene Tucker on Sunday, March 1, 2020.

 “FAILURE AND SUCCESS”

(Homily texts: Genesis 2: 15–17; 3: 1–7 & Matthew 4: 1-11)

The First Sunday in Lent always places before us the account of our Lord’s temptation in the wilderness. This event, which marks the end of the preparation of the Lord for His earthly ministry, is recorded for us by all three of the Synoptic Gospel writers, Matthew, Mark and Luke.[1]

The season of Lent itself is modeled on the Lord’s temptation, for this season is forty days long (minus the Sundays in the season), just as the Lord’s temptation was of the same duration.

The three lectionary readings appointed for this day are remarkably well suited to the theme of this season, for the Genesis account records Adam and Eve’s failure when confronted with temptation in the Garden of Eden, while St. Paul explains the significance of Adam and Eve’s failure, informing us that, through their failure, sin entered into the world. But then Paul goes on to tell us that, though Adam and Eve failed, Jesus successfully met the temptations that were put before Him.

Since we’ve raised the matter of failure and success, let’s look at the Genesis account, and then at the account of Jesus’ temptation as Matthew relates it to us..

We’ll begin with Adam and Eve in the Garden.

This passage serves as a “Primer on Sin and Temptation”. Whatever the actual events are that lie behind this account, the passage’s existence in Holy Scripture seeks to inform us about the ways of the Tempter (Satan), and about the ways in which temptation is placed before us. We can draw the following conclusions from the account itself:

Questioning God’s instructions:  In Genesis 3: 1, we read that the Tempter said to Eve. “Did God actually say, ‘You shall not eat of any tree in the garden?’”  Temptation often begins with an appeal to distrust or question what God has made known.

Remembering what God said:  Notices Eve’s response to the serpent’s question about what God had told her and her husband, Adam. A careful look discloses that she can’t remember accurately what the exact instructions were about which tree was off-limits. Here is the text:  God’s instructions: “You may surely eat of every tree of the garden, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat…” (Genesis 2: 16b). Eve’s recollection differs from God’s instruction: She said to the serpent, “We may eat of any tree in the garden, but God said, ‘You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden…’” (Genesis 3: 2b – 3)  Notice that Eve doesn’t remember exactly which tree it was that God said was off-limits. (I’ve highlighted the difference in italics.) Her response is the opening that the serpent needs to question God’s instructions, as he makes an appeal to Eve, urging her to disregard what God had said about the consequences of disobeying God’s commands.

An appeal to naturally-arising needs:  Notice that the Tempter’s entry into the encounter with Eve centers around an appeal to naturally-arising needs. In this case, it’s the appeal to food, first of all. The serpent suggests that Eve eat of the fruit of the tree, and she notices that the fruit is desirable. But the Tempter’s appeal is also to another important, naturally-arising need:  The need for security. Genesis 3: 6 puts it this way: “When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate….” (Once again, I’ve highlighted the point by using italics that, in being able to be wise, one can be more in control of one’s wellbeing and safety.)

Separation:  An important aspect of the account of the Fall (which is what this incident is usually called) which is often overlooked is the fact that Adam is standing right next to Eve. But the serpent’s approach isn’t to both of them together, it’s to Eve alone. Adam remains silent and passive throughout the encounter. Here, too, we can glean an important point about the ways that temptation works: Oftentimes, we – like Eve – are at our most vulnerable when we are alone and are separated from others.

But where Adam and Eve failed, our Lord succeeds.

Notice the similarities between the encounter with temptation that confronted Eve, and the temptations that Jesus encountered. Here are some of them:

Misuse of God’s word:  Satan’s second temptation attempts to misuse God’s word, He says, “If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down (from the pinnacle of the temple), for it is written, ‘He will command his angels concerning you,’ and ‘On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.’”

Remembering what God had said:  Where Eve fails to remember God’s word, Jesus remembers accurately, and makes use of that word to counter Satan’s suggestions.

An appeal to naturally-arising needs:  The Tempter’s first temptation centers around the need for food. Jesus is vulnerable because He is hungry. Notice the parallel to Eve’s temptation…both begin with an appeal to food. But another of Satan’s suggestions has to do with the need for security, in much the same way that Eve was tempted. That’s what the suggestion that Jesus fall down and worship him amounts to. It’s a temptation to have security in the form of having control over the kingdoms of the world.

Separation:  Jesus is alone in the wilderness with the Tempter. As we noticed in the Genesis account, so too, here, is the reality that Jesus was at His most vulnerable because he is alone with the Tempter in a hostile environment.

Knowing how evil works, and by what avenues temptation might come our way, is essential if we are to faithfully follow God’s will for our lives. Just as a good soldier will know about an adversary’s abilities and ways, so, too, must we be aware of the abilities and ways of our adversary, the devil.

But we can claim the same victory that Jesus accomplished by appealing to His power and presence in our lives. Along with that power, we can be reminded of the ways in which evil comes to attempt to separate us from God and from one another. After all, that’s the outcome of Adam and Eve’s failure. They were separated from one another and from God, as well. Jesus came to reunite us with God.

Where Adam and Eve failed, Jesus succeeded. Indeed, one way to regard all of Jesus’ life, teaching, ministry, death and resurrection is to see it as a rebuke against all the things that would destroy human life and which would attempt to separate us from God. Essentially, Jesus rolls back the effects of sin, claiming one victory after another, and offering to us that same ability and power.

AMEN.

       

---

[1]   Mark’s account is very brief, mentioning only that the temptation took place in the wilderness, and recording that it lasted forty days.