The moral centrality of listening
Sermon at St Columba’s Uniting Church, Braddon ACT,
Sunday 8 September 2024, Robbie Tulip
The theme I will focus on today is the need to question our presuppositions. We all bring existing values, assumptions, prejudices and beliefs to bear when we make judgements and decisions. Our emotional instincts tell us to accept these beliefs rather than assess them in the light of reason. Our texts today call us to reverse this instinctive attitude and instead ground our ethics in logic and evidence, in a way that looks to long term impacts rather than immediate and obvious effects. These are important themes for my work in the multi faith chaplaincy at the Australian National University.
The Epistle of James gives a great example. Prejudice in favour of the rich and against the poor can be a natural sentiment for a church, or for any institution, who ask what a newcomer might bring. The contrasting receptions that James describes for rich and poor visitors show how easy it can be to live by prejudice, when we assume that a wealthy person can bring money and skills and connections and growth, while a poor person can only bring burdens and work and risk. The evidence of our senses sees the rich as worldly heirs, and as usually more educated and articulate and popular than the poor. James describes the reaction of partiality, welcoming the rich and ignoring the poor. This is an attitude we can easily understand, if not endorse.
Even when James insists that God has chosen the poor in the world to be rich in faith and to be heirs of the kingdom, there is a frequent tendency to discount this teaching. The gospel calls us to an inversion of worldly values. Instead, Jesus argues that material wealth corrupts the relationship between rich people and God, in ways that are sometimes obvious but are also sometimes quite hard to detect. These are complex questions that invite us to reflect on what sort of a world we want to create.
Our reading from Proverbs provides more examples of how the Bible challenges our biases. Secular values find it hard to believe Proverb 22:8, “Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity, and the rod of anger will fail”, and 22:9 “Those who are generous are blessed, for they share their bread with the poor.” So often we experience the opposite of these Biblical teachings. The blessings of comfort are given to those who are selfish, while perpetrators of injustice often get away with it. These proverbs are sometimes seen as pious platitudes, wishful comfort without a basis in fact or reason.
Against such cynicism, we can observe that these proverbs have profound meaning and truth, but the timeframe they work on is slow. The calamity reaped by the unjust is often deferred or transferred. The spiritual benefits of generosity can be hard to discern, but some reflection can show its importance for both giver and recipient. God asks us to see the big picture, looking to the eventual overall consequences of different courses of action. That ethical framework is a difficult perspective to achieve, seeking to stand under the eye of eternity. A starting point can be a rigorous questioning of our beliefs. Do we hold beliefs just because they are comfortable and familiar, or do we try to find a coherent approach, without hypocrisy and contradiction? This problem of working toward a consistent vision should be a central moral question, and it was this call to integrity before God that inspired Jesus to walk the way of the cross to his resurrection.
The conversation between Jesus and the Syrophoenician woman, also known in Matthew’s account as the Canaanite woman, picks up this problem of careless prejudice in the most vivid way. Tribal thinking is an instinctive human trait. We have evolved to see belonging to our clan as the basis of identity. Community loyalty and trust are core tribal values. In this story, we see Jesus recognising the pitfalls of instinctive tribal thinking, and instead reviewing his emotional response against a higher vision.
At first, Jesus just ignores the woman’s pleas on behalf of her sick daughter. He seems exhausted after a long day, and just wants some privacy. Then, in a line in Matthew, missing in Mark, he tells her “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,” indicating that he is unwilling to help because the sick girl is not Jewish. The woman’s continued efforts earn the rude racist dismissal from Jesus, “Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.”
Calling foreigners dogs is entirely out of character for Jesus, out of line with his central teaching of love of God and neighbour. It is a demeaning racial slur that today we would see as illegal and offensive. The idea that the salvation of God is freely available to all is so central to Christianity that this line from Jesus appears shocking and inexplicable. Christianity regards Jesus as perfect and without sin, making this incident very surprising. Theologians try to explain it away by claiming Jesus did not mean what he says, but I see it differently. It is more about the high moral value of learning to listen and respond with care.
Perhaps we need to revise our assumptions about perfection? If we see Jesus as fully human and fully divine, then surely his ability to see that he has made a mistake and to change his mind in light of evidence is an essential part of his humanity?
Jewish exclusivity was a major theme of messianic expectations in the Old Testament. The Messiah was envisioned as a descendant of King David who would reign over Israel as a righteous, earthly king, bringing a return to Jewish sovereignty. As we know, these assumptions came to be dramatically questioned in the theory of salvation brought by Christ, with his central focus on love, truth, equality and justice. However, this story suggests that Jesus had initially assumed and accepted these Jewish ideas about exclusivity, without properly thinking them through.
Jesus’s first responses to the Canaanite woman seems to align with traditional Jewish exclusivity. His comments about dogs and the lost sheep of Israel reflect the common Jewish expectation that the Messiah’s primary mission was to the Jewish people, the descendants of Abraham, and that God’s promises were centred around the restoration of Israel.
The continued insistent pleas for help from this poor foreign woman, someone with no social status, seem to cause an epiphany for Jesus, a sudden realisation that his attitude was wrong. Jesus changes his mind, marking a decisive shift. He recognises that salvation cannot be confined to a tribe but must be universally available for all, through the grace of God.
Again, Matthew’s account expands on the story we read in Mark. Jesus is listening and learning and changing his mind, not just proclaiming a dogmatic evangelical doctrine, the kerygma. When he says “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire”, at Matthew 15:28, the old idea of the messiah as a Jewish warlord breaks down. The daughter is healed because of the mother’ faith in God. Sincerity and humility, not ethnicity, become the basis for receiving God’s blessing and healing. The story highlights the universal nature of Jesus’ mission, which transcends ethnic boundaries and the traditional messianic focus on Israel alone.
It seems that Jesus has changed his mind. This is something politicians are taught never to do, as it makes them seem weak and indecisive. Napoleon’s advice was to never retreat and never retract. Refusing to admit any error might create a public image of perfection, but it conceals numerous flaws, as Napoleon himself discovered during his disastrous retreat from Moscow.
The form of perfection we find in this story from Jesus is quite different. In this story, Jesus values inclusive principles of respect, listening, dialogue, equality, forgiveness, mercy and human dignity. It is often the case that we assume things to be true that careful reflection and dialogue can reveal to be flawed. That is how our social values evolve. The dialogue between Jesus and the Canaanite woman is a parable for the importance of courteous listening and reflection.
Jesus took this inclusive principle to an extreme with his call in the Sermon on the Mount to love our enemies. The situation in the world of his time was that previously separate cultures were thrown together, creating what we call the common era. Christianity emerged as a way all those different communities could live together with mutual respect, although this was only partial. The Empire needed to retain Roman primacy, and so the creeds simplified and distorted the original gospel, losing some of the sublime transforming message of love.
We are now in a world situation somewhat similar to the early Roman Empire, with different cultures learning to live together. Jesus was able to transcend his own instinctive prejudices to recognise the universal dignity of our shared humanity. We can look now to how our tribal instincts govern our decisions and values, and we can challenge our own presuppositions. The healing mercy that Christ showed to helps us see the universal saving love of God as the basis of a transformed and liberating ethical vision.
Lectionary Texts
Proper 18 (23)Sixteenth Sunday after Pentecost Sep 08, 2024 | Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23 Psalm 125 | Isaiah 35:4-7a Psalm 146 | James 2:1-10, (11-13), 14-17 | Mark 7:24-37 |
Permalink Comments off