I
Samuel 16:1 – 13
Psalm
23
Ephesians
5:8 – 14
John
9:1 – 41
This
is the homily given at St. John’s, Huntingdon, Pennsylvania on Sunday, March
19, 2023, by Fr. Gene Tucker.
“THE EXTENT OF GOD’S JUDGMENT?”
(Homily text: John 9:1 – 41)
When God throws a divine thunderbolt in
judgment on someone, just how far does God’s judgment go? Does it affect only
the person(s) involved, or could it go further, landing on others, as well?
Essentially, this question lies at the
root of the disciples’ questioning of the man’s condition, and also of the
Pharisees’ investigation into the man’s condition and his healing by Jesus.
Both questions have to do with the matter of sin, and of God’s judgment for
sin.
The disciples ask the Lord, “Who
sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’.
In a similar vein, the Pharisees
declare that the man was born in “utter sin”,[1] his
utterly sinful condition - stemming from his birth - being responsible for his
blindness.
The disciples’ question about the
origins of the sin which brought about the man’s condition might be based on
something we read in the Ten Commandments. In the second commandment, we read
this: “You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of
anything that is the heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is
in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for
I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on
the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me.”[2]
The disciples, then, may have had this truth
in mind as they ask if it was the man’s parents who were the ones who brought
judgment upon the man. They may have been influenced by the common belief –
back then – that the cause of illness was due to sin, God’s judgment falling on
the wayward and the disobedient. In addition, the fact that the man had been
born blind may have led them to believe that, since the man hadn’t yet had the
opportunity to commit sin, it must’ve been his parents’ wrongdoing that brought
about his blindness.
The Pharisees’ approach is a bit
different.
They attribute the man’s condition to
his sinful state. But they also declare him to be in “utter sin”, having been
born in that condition. (In that sense, the Pharisees assessment of the
situation is somewhat similar to the question the disciples raise.) Their
approbation of the man is based in their conviction that he is a sinner who is
beyond God’s ability to touch and redeem. But their declaration also lies in
something else: The man’s willingness to go toe-to-toe with the Pharisees,
challenging their beliefs and their attitudes. The Pharisees declare, “Would
you teach us?”.[3] The blind-man-who-now-sees challenges the Pharisees’ convictions and outlook
(and, as well, their own confidence in their own self-importance).
Three of the attitudes which seem to have been commonplace during the time of the Lord's earthly ministry are overturned with this miracle.
For one thing, He does away with the
almost fanatical obsession with the observance of the Sabbath day that the
Pharisees (and others) had. (In another circumstance, Jesus declares that the
Sabbath day was made for humankind, not the other way around.)[4] The
Lord affirms that doing good for a human being, even on the Sabbath day, is far
more important than a rigorous observance of the day of rest.
For another, we see that the man whom
Jesus healed was able to grasp truths that the so-called religious authorities couldn’t
(or wouldn’t) grasp. The man declares that One who healed him was from God. The
man, essentially, lectures the Pharisees, telling them truths that he had come
to know, but truths they could not understand. The point here, I think is that
God’s truths can be discerned by anyone who comes to God in faith. It isn’t
just the theologically-informed, or the “authorities” who are the masters of
these things. (It’s worth noting that this understanding is one of the key
tenets of the sixteenth-century Reformation….God’s truths can be discerned by
anyone.)
For another, Jesus debunks the idea
that the blind man’s condition was due to his (or his parents’) sin(s).[5]
Here we come to a key truth: God is
able to bring good things out of bad things. In other words, God is able to bring
about a new, better and more hopeful future, using the circumstances of the
past as the foundation for a new, recreated reality. Jesus tells the disciples
that it wasn’t due to the man’s sins that he was born blind, but that his
condition would be the way in which God’s goodness and mercy could be seen.
Essentially, that’s the central message
of the events of Good Friday and Easter. The evil brought upon Jesus as He is
condemned to die on the cross is due, directly, to the sin of those who accused
Him. But God overcame that evil and ushered in a new, brighter and more hopeful
future as the Lord is raised on Easter Sunday morning.
Returning to the idea with which we
began, we can see in the events of Good Friday and Easter that God’s goodness
and mercy extend beyond the individual, showering others with the blessings of
that goodness and mercy.
Thanks be to God!
AMEN.
[1] John 9:34
[2] Exodus 20:4 - 5
[3] Verse 34
[4] Mark 2:27
[5] In this connection it’s important to understand that wrongdoing on someone’s part often has a negative impact on others. The truth of the Second Commandment stands, and ancient Israel understood this as it experienced the fallout in families and in communities of the evil brought about by someone’s actions. The Lord’s declaration that sin wasn’t the cause of the blind man’s condition indicates to us that sin and wrongdoing aren’t automatically the cause of someone’s illness.
