Public Virtue

This sermon was heard at the First Presbyterian Church in Berryville, Arkansas on Sunday June 13, 2010, the 11th Sunday in Ordinary Time.

1 Kings 21:1-10, 15-21
Psalm 5:1-8
Galatians 2:15-21
Luke 7:36-8:3

May the words of my mouth and the mediations of our hearts be acceptable to you, O Lord, our rock and our redeemer. Amen

A couple of weeks ago I said something that raised a couple of eyebrows. In the sermon called “What is Truth” I said that truth “like any virtue is public, not private.”[1], [2] So the question becomes, can virtue be private? Must virtue be public? I am here to say virtue must be public or it is no virtue at all.

Now this is a departure for me, I love to set up an insightful conclusion after careful development of a theme, analysis of the scriptural text, enlightening observation, and illuminating illustrations. I love to explore the text not only in English, but in either Hebrew or Greek depending on the text of the day. Not today though, here’s today’s conclusion: There is no such thing as private virtue, virtue must be public or there is no virtue at all.

An example of what I mean can be found in the movie “High Plains Drifter.” In a flashback scene that drives the movie, Clint Eastwood’s character, The Stranger has a dream. It begins with a bloody man lying in the street. The man is being whipped by three men. It is dark, but the silhouettes of those watching are clearly the townspeople. The bloody man begs the townspeople for help, but receives none. Only one woman, Sarah Belding, tries to help, and she is held back by her husband. The bloody man is Marshall Jim Duncan.[3], [4]

So who is virtuous, the townspeople who watch their Marshall being whipped to death? They should know murder is wrong; still they might be shocked into silence by what they are seeing. They might be afraid, in fear for their lives; they could be thinking that if they interfere they could be next. Finally, some of them are bound to know [SPOILER ALERT] the murderers are actually in cahoots with the local town leaders who are trying to stop the Marshall from reporting the local mine’s illegal operation to the authorities. Or is the only one who has virtue Sarah Belding who tries to stop it?

The only person with virtue is the one who acts, putting her life and marriage at risk trying to help the Marshall. Some probably are shocked by this public display of brutal murder, knowing murder is a sin. Some of the others are afraid of losing what they have. Some of the others just won’t be bothered. Some of the others are corrupt. Little virtue is found here. Virtue is only found in public action, action only Sarah takes.

Simeon shows his virtue when he proclaims to the amazement of Mary and Joseph that the Lord’s promise has been fulfilled, he has seen the Lord’s Messiah.[5] Anna shows her virtue when she praises God sharing Jesus with all who were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem.[6] Those who praised Jesus’ preaching and teaching showed their virtue.[7] The devil learned about the virtue of Jesus first hand when the Messiah declared his allegiance and faith to God instead of to the temptations of this world.[8] Even in their fear, the demons worshiped Jesus declaring “You are the Son of God.”[9] The demons weren’t virtuous, but they knew who was.

Of course, the disciples who followed Jesus showed their virtue in their very public allegiance to the Lord’s Messiah.[10]

Today’s reading gives us more. Today’s reading gives us one who sins acting virtuously and one who is presumably virtuous acting sinfully.

Let’s begin with the host, he’s a Pharisee and we know what that means. He’s powerful. The Pharisees were the most prominent and influential group in ancient Palestinian Jewish life and the most precise interpreters of the law. They were scrupulous in their observance of the law, in particular concerning Sabbath observance, tithing, and purity laws.[11] He’s pretty well to do. We can come to this conclusion based on this passage. The descriptions of the Pharisee’s house and table show that he has the assets to live pretty well.

For the sake of clarity, I want to take a quick peek into a rabbit hole. Being powerful and well to do are not sins, they are not evil, they do not make this Pharisee virtuous or unvirtuous. It’s what is done with riches and power that points toward virtue or away from it. Yes, yes, I know about the camel and the eye of the needle, but that passage teaches it’s “more difficult,” not “impossible” for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.[12] We see examples of both sides of this needle everyday. But I digress…

On the other hand, scripture leaves us with no question about the woman. She is a sinner and around town she is known as a sinner. The Pharisee notes that if Jesus were a prophet, he would have known what kind of sinful woman she is. Near the end of this passage, Jesus acknowledges that she is a sinner, one who has a great need for forgiveness of her sins. While scripture only hints at what variety of sinner she is, the heading of this passage in my study bible[13] says she is a harlot.

Let’s note again that the passage describes her as a sinner of means. Between the alabaster jar and the ointment held within, her sins certainly had nothing to do with poor stewardship of money.

But our passage gives us more, more about the virtue of the host and the harlot.

Providing hospitality to his guests was Simon the Pharisee’s first responsibility. The hospitality codes were older than Abraham and infinitely important. When a guest is invited into the home, it is customary to offer water to wash the feet. In a time and place where people wore sandals and livestock shared the roads, washing the feet became an important welcoming ritual. It was also proper to offer oil. In a time when Ivory soap was still 1850 years on the horizon[14] oil was used like soap. And the welcoming kiss was as ordinary as a handshake to us today. Simon could not be bothered to offer Jesus any of these things.

So what was Simon doing while he should have been fulfilling his obligation to Jesus? He may have been gossiping with the other guests, bragging about the coup of getting Jesus to come over for dinner. He may have been too busy showing off for the other guests to care for the guest who should have received the most honor. And here’s a question left unanswered by the text—was Jesus the guest of honor? Was Jesus afforded the place of an honored guest or was he treated like a ragamuffin prophet from Nazareth; and after all, can anything good ever come out of Nazareth?[15]

Frankly for a host, between what we know and what we might guess, Simon’s actions showed that he valued his other guests more than Jesus. He valued the virtues of a Pharisee’s life in the synagogue and in the temple more than life in Christ. His virtue extended to some guests, but not to all. Not to the one who deserved it most or the one who arguably deserved it least.

As for the sinful woman, in the home of the Pharisee, she shows what she is willing to risk for Jesus of Nazareth. At the Pharisee’s table, she takes expensive ointment from an expnesive jar and anoints Jesus. She washes the feet of the Lord with her tears. She dries the feet of the Lord with her hair, and if we can take a quick reference from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians, a woman’s long hair was to be her glory. She took the things about her that were most treasured by society, even if society did not treasure her, and worshiped at the feet of the Lord Jesus.

When it comes to the question of worshiping God, the sinful woman is more virtuous than the Pharisee. We see this in both of their public acts at the banquet. In his actions, the Pharisee displays his virtue by ignoring Jesus. In her actions, the sinful woman shows her virtue to God incarnate.

To say this again, we cannot refute the sinful acts of the Pharisee and the woman. We know the woman is sinful because scripture tells us so. We are told that the Pharisee is sinful when Jesus reminds him “I entered your house and you gave me no water for my feet, you gave me no kiss, and you did not anoint my head with oil.” We learn that both have sinned, one publically and one privately.

This is where Jesus teaches Simon with a question. Jesus asks, “A certain creditor had two debtors; one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. When they could not pay, he canceled the debts for both of them. Now which of them will love him more?”

Something Simon the Pharisee would have known that we may not is that the normal living daily wage in that time was one denarius. He also would have also known that both of these debts, one of two months pay and the other of twenty months, would have been nearly impossible for a common worker to repay.

Simon answers rightly: “I suppose the one for whom he canceled the greater debt will love him more.” It’s not that both won’t love, but the one with the greater debt will love more.

Jesus takes Simon’s words and tells all who will listen, “Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven; hence she has shown great love. But the one to whom little is forgiven loves little. Then he said to her, ‘Your sins are forgiven.’” Jesus demonstrates virtue lies in holy work.

Know this though; it is not our virtue that leads to forgiveness, not at all. Jesus shares this truth with everyone at the banquet. Jesus tells her that her sins are forgiven, but not because of what she’s done. The way we often see it, by the order of the events found in scripture, the sinful woman performs a great act of penance and generosity and then Jesus says “you are forgiven.” But that’s not what Jesus says. The key is found in the word “hence.”

Look at verse 47 again: “Therefore, I tell you, her sins, which were many, have been forgiven.” Jesus says her sins are forgiven without mention of her actions. She has sinned and her sins have been forgiven. Her actions at the banquet have nothing to do with gaining forgiveness. Jesus continues: “Hence she has shown great love.”

She anoints and kisses his feet not to receive forgiveness of sins but because she has received this glorious gift.

We work, and work, and work; but even before we can consider what we might try to do to please God and win the prize; it is freely offered. We are saved by grace through faith, by the grace that is freely offered we are called to respond in faith actively.

Our love and the actions that follow from our love are the product of God’s love and forgiveness, not their cause. She has shown great love performing Simon’s hosting duties at the expense of her own safety and reputation. She has lived a sin-soaked sin-sickened life, but she had faith that the source of her salvation was in Jesus. And to use an old expression, she showed an attitude of gratitude to the Lord.

Her virtue is on display for all to see while Simon, whose debt is also cancelled by the Lord, Simon’s virtue lies on his way of life; in the ways of the temple run by human beings, not the way of new life in Jesus Christ.

We are called to accept and respond to the love and redemption freely given. We know Jesus’ saying, “From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required; and from the one to whom much has been entrusted, even more will be demanded.”[16] We also need to share God’s love by Christ in the world. The sinful woman shows virtue to Christ and the world. The Pharisee shows no virtue—and Christ shows us his lack of virtue.

By the way, at the end of “High Plains Drifter” [SPOILER ALERT] Mordecai[17] shoots Sarah Belding’s husband Lewis dead after he aims his rifle at the Stranger’s back attempting to kill him.[18] I don’t want to make much more of a fictional killing, even one done in defense of the questionable Stranger, but Mordecai shows that as with many things in life, so too with virtue, it’s better late than never.

[1] http://timelovesahero.blogspot.com/2010/05/what-is-truth.html, retrieved June 12, 2010.
[2] This concept from the Rev. Dr. Michael Jinkins, as an Associate Professor of Pastoral Theology. He later became Professor and Dean of the Seminary. He is currently President-Elect of Louisville Theological Seminary. Congratulations Michael.
[3] “High Plains Drifter Plot Synopsis,” “Internet Movie Database, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0068699/synopsis, retrieved June 12, 2010.
[4] “High Plains Drifter,” Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Plains_Drifter, retrieved June 12, 2010.
[5] Luke 2:25-32
[6] Luke 2:38
[7] Luke 2:41-52, 4:16-30
[8] Luke 4:1-13
[9] Luke 4:41
[10] Luke 5:1-11, 27-32, 6:12-16
[11] Pharisees, “The New Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible.” Volume 4. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 2009, page 469 ff.
[12] Luke 18:18-30 and parallels
[13] The New Interpreters’ Study Bible, Luke 7:36-50, RESPONSES OF A PHARISEE AND A HARLOT
[14] Ivory soap was first sold in 1879, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivory_soap, accessed June 15, 2007
[15] John 1:46
[16] Luke 12:48b
[17] Thinking about this later, I believe Mordecai is the stand in for the audience in this movie. He is the second least despicable character in the film after Sarah Belding. It is though his eyes in a later flashback that the audience comes to realize what is going on with the killing of the Marshall. Mordecai witnesses the killing of the Marshall from beneath a plank sidewalk.
[18] Ibid notes 3, 4