It borders on blasphemy to say so, but I get the thought process of Judas Iscariot. Part of it, to be sure, may stem from Norman Jewison’s film version of Jesus Christ Superstar, in which Carl Anderson, playing Judas, is dynamic and passionate and has a point to make, while Ted Neeley’s portrayal of Jesus was, um, underwhelming.
But more than that, like
Judas I, too, am practically minded. I
will often shut down my wilder dreams because they do not align with the
practicalities of things. Like Judas in
the 12th chapter of John, I am offended by opulence and wastefulness,
especially if the resources could have been used to alleviate someone else’s
difficulties. And like Judas, who
managed the disciples’ finances, I’m pretty good with numbers, so when I was
asked to sit on the board at our strata, yup, I’m now the treasurer.
So what does practically
minded Judas have to say for himself? The hymn verses before this sermon (“Said
Judas to Mary”, verses 1-3) gives a solid summary of the scene at hand. Mary of Bethany has just poured expensive perfume
on Jesus’ feet, and wiped his feet with her hair, an act of extravagance,
devotion and love, but Judas objects: “Oh Mary, oh Mary, oh think of the poor –
this ointment, it could have been sold; and think of the blankets and think of
the bread you could buy with the silver and gold.” On the surface, this objection comes across
as perfectly reasonable, especially for those of us working in the non-profit
sector, where we need to be so cost-conscious…but there is more to the
objection than meets the eye. Jesus sees through it – or perhaps he sees the
true malevolence of Judas, the one doing the asking. Though he speaks respectfully to Judas, Jesus
lifts up what Mary has done – comforting and sad and sensual - as a gift of
love, and urges Judas and the rest of the disciples to receive this gift in the
spirit in which it was given.
We live in a world where
these Judas-shaped objections to kindness and empathy are presented on a daily
basis: on social media, talk radio, TV news panels, even in common conversation. Someone calls for an injustice to be
addressed, and within moments objections are raised to make the concern look small,
irrelevant, even self-serving. We know
what this looks like: in the midst of the deaths of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna
Taylor, and George Floyd in 2020, Black Lives Matter needed to name the
devaluing, targeting, and lack of safety of people of colour… and before long, middle
class white voices were saying, “well, ALL lives matter, not just black
lives.” As Greta Thunberg raised the
alarm about the climate crisis, urging world leaders to recognize that slow-moving
strategies would not help a house already on fire, social media keyboard
jockeys wrote, “oh yeah, and did she walk to Davos/Glasgow/New York to say that,
or did she take a plane?” As
ground-penetrating radar finally awakened the Canadian populace to the horrors
of the Indian Residential Schools, cue the letters to the editor, doubting the
science and minimizing the realities because, well, most of us Canadians of a
certain age got bullied at school and were threatened with the strap if we
misbehaved. And even now, within Made in
Canada online groups, there’s a tiring string of posts that make excuse upon
excuse in order to avoid any changes to their buying behaviours and falsely
insinuate that the ”buy Canadian” movement started this mess. In each case,
part of me is tricked into thinking, “that sounds like a reasonable point” but
if I pause, and take a step back to see the bigger picture, I will often see
that the naysayer has a vested interest and would lose their current advantage
if the issue at hand actually got dealt with.
The objection, even if bearing a grain of truth, is more often than not,
not being spoken in good faith.
A term for these types of
objections is “whataboutism” – you know, when someone immediately says, “well,
what about this other situation that is even worse” in order to deflect
attention away from the issue at hand.
The author Shahida Arabi, an expert on how to deal with narcissism, has
some tips on how to deal with “whataboutism” and related tactics (and I’ll put
a link to her salty, excellent article at the end of the online version of this
sermon). One of her tips, when someone
attempts to change topics to deflect attention away from something you care
about, is “Don’t be derailed – if someone pulls a switcheroo on you, you can…
continue stating the facts without giving in to their distractions. Redirect
their redirection by saying, ‘That’s not what I am talking about. Let’s stay
focused on [this] issue.’ If they’re not interested, disengage and spend your
energy on something more constructive….This doesn’t mean that the issues that
are being brought up don’t matter, it just means that this specific time and
place may not be the best context to discuss them”. I share this info this
morning, because I think we were already seeing an early version of
“whataboutism” in the objections raised by Judas, beneath his discomfort at Mary’s
anointing of Jesus with such intimacy and devotion. It’s not that the issue Judas raises about the
proper use of their limited resources is a non-issue – the proper stewardship
of resources is a legitimate concern for all Churches and charities - but Jesus
makes clear that this was Mary’s special moment, and needed to remain so; the attempt
by Judas to insert himself into the middle of it with his whatabout diversion
was not welcome. At this, I gotta say,
“yay, Jesus!”
To me, it’s not coincidental
that this deep religious response of Mary is something Judas feels compelled to
shut down. Throughout history we see
this all the time. A male with authority,
like Judas, simply cannot abide by a female’s powerful faith expression, and
feels compelled to jump in and mansplain a “better” way for her to
respond. Not because he had anything
actually figured out, but because she was a woman he had the power and
authority to shut her down. And again,
something truly noteworthy here is that when Judas attempts to speak over top
of Mary, Jesus won’t take the bait, for Mary needed to continue as she
was. The moment, again, belongs to
Mary: not to Judas and really, not even to Jesus.
When I was studying for
ministry throughout the 80s – as an undergrad Religious Studies student in
Regina, as a seminarian in Vancouver - I had such high hopes for gender
equality and social justice, in the Church and in society. One of my teachers, I must say, was Shannon,
with her deep involvement with the Student Christian Movement, World Council of
Churches, and her up to date reading of theological and sociological
trends. In those days, more and more
women were entering ministry, sexual orientations and gender diversity were
starting to be talked about openly, and we even had a couple of Roman Catholic
women studying with us at VST, “just in case” ordination might someday be
possible for them. The Very Rev Dr Lois Wilson was the United Church Moderator,
and then she became a President of the World Council of Churches. The 80s were such promising days. But in the subsequent years, any time real
progress is being made, any time the glass ceiling was actually threatened,
Judas and his ilk would change the rules and things got worse. (Since 2016, a whole lot worse). In a time when the world is subject to so
many whims of evil intent, it is crucial for us as Church to be clear on our
absolute belief in the right to self-determination of people of all genders,
all gender expressions, all sexual orientations, all nationalities and
citizenship categories, everyone. Though
the institutional Church sold out to the powers of patriarchy and empire way
back in the 4th century, the original Jesus people, the people of
the way – were much more egalitarian.
Our gospel reading today, in which Jesus embraces, encourages,
celebrates the ministry of spiritual devotion and care, expressed by Mary, is
such a wonderful snapshot of God’s desire for all of God’s children to have true
agency, a full range of opportunity and authority over their own lives. And when Judas tries to make it about him,
even when he may well have had something worth dealing with later, Jesus makes
it clear: not now, Judas. This is not
about you.
Over the ages, the season of
Lent has been a time of year that is willing to enter some of these places of discomfort
and lament. Lent makes space for us to name sinful actions or exclusions that
need to be fixed. Lent is also a time
in which we recall that the final chapter of the story of Jesus Christ, is not
his execution but his resurrection, and we celebrate Christ’s everlasting
presence by the way we live our lives. In
our willingness to be led by Mary rather than Judas, in all that we say and do
as Church, we are living witnesses to that resurrection power, which lifts up
and liberates all who are singled out, mocked and endangered. We are
called to advocacy and clarity and as we embrace this calling, Christ’s
unfolding promise of life, light and love shines its light on this day and our
shared path.
May this be so. Amen.
References cited:
Carter, Sydney. “Said Judas
to Mary” (hymn, composed 1964). Voices United #129.
Jewison, Norman. “Jesus
Christ, Superstar” (film, Universal Pictures, 1973).
Recommended reading:
Arabi, Shahida – quoted by
Effenus Henderson, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20-diversion-tactics-highly-manipulative-people-use-you-henderson
Gear, Janet. Undivided
Love. Altona, MB: Friesen, 2022.
Schussler Fiorenza,
Elisabeth. In Memory of Her. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox,
1983.
© 2025, Rev Greg Wooley,
Osoyoos-Oliver United Church Pastoral Charge.
No comments:
Post a Comment