Tuesday of Holy Week

John 12:20-36

All except the final verses 34-36 of this text are used also on the Fifth Sunday in Lent and were commented upon above at that place. There we considered the two symbols that are used in this text to signify the death of the Johannine Jesus. His death is compared to the “death” of a kernel of grain, a change and germination that is necessary in order that new life will result. His death is also depicted in this text as a situation in which the Johannine Jesus is lifted up between the earth and the sky on a Roman cross.

On this occasion, let us look more closely at verse 25, a Johannine explication of the “death” and germination of a kernel of grain as a symbol of Jesus’ death on the cross. Most translations of verse 25 into English indicate that the Johannine Jesus here said that the person who loves the person’s own life loses it, but that the person who hates the person’s life here in this world will retain it eternally, expressing the form of the Greek verb miseo here with the word hates. In most instances of the use of forms of the Greek verb miseo in our literature, the English word hate is appropriate. Here and in Luke 14:26, however, there are better and more nuanced ways in which this Greek form should be expressed in the English language. It is not a good translation here in John 12:25 to say that a person should hate the person’s own life here. In the context of this verb in John 12:25, I suggest that the verse should be translated as I express it in my The New Testament: A New Translation and Redaction (Lima, OH: Fairway Press, 2001) as follows: “The person who selfishly wants to retain that person’s life is going to lose it, and the person who selflessly gives that person’s life to others in this world will actually retain it into life eternally.”

In the three verses (John 12:34-36) that are used here but not on the Fifth Sunday in Lent the Johannine depiction of Jesus as “the light” is used. The idea that the Johannine Jesus will not be physically present within the Johannine community much longer, as expressed more extensively in the “farewell discourses” in John 14-16, is included.

1 Corinthians 1:18-31

In this text the Apostle Paul proclaims Christ crucified as the one whom God, through the resurrection of Jesus as the Christ, made the primary manifestation of the power of God and of the wisdom of God. The word of the cross (Christ crucified) makes us wise, makes us righteous, makes us holy, and redeems us from the power of sin. This is what God does, not what we do. Therefore, we should not boast about what we have done. We should boast about what God in the death and resurrection of Jesus as the Christ does.

Isaiah 49:1-7

In verse 3 of this second of what we as Christians call the Servant Songs of the Isaiah tradition the Servant is identified as “Israel.” This identification was probably added to the text at some point after the initial composition and use of this text. It is difficult to see, however, how the Servant could be Israel when it is written in verse 5 that the Servant is commissioned by God to bring Jacob back to God, to gather Israel back to God and in verse 6 to bring back to life the tribes of Jacob, to restore those who will be preserved in Israel. Our Christian identification of the Servant with Jesus as the Christ does not work perfectly either, unless we make the followers of Jesus as the Christ to be the “New Israel.” When we do this, we should call ourselves at most “a new people of God,” rather than “the New Israel.” When we call ourselves “the New Israel,” we are being arrogantly supersessionistic.

Within the context of the Isaiah traditions, the Servant, and, farther along in the traditions as we have them, the Suffering Servant, should probably best be understood as a composition of poetic expressions by a variety of inspired Israelites of the ideal prophet, the ideal inspired person in that tradition. In that sense, the Servant or Suffering Servant concept can be used both by Jews and by us as Christians today, with neither group preempting the concept.

Psalm 71:1-14

The psalmist, during the “senior years” of the psalmist’s life, calls upon God to rescue the psalmist from those who are cruel and oppressive, from those who are showing no respect. The psalmist affirms that the psalmist has depended upon the Lord God ever since the Lord gave life to the psalmist when the psalmist was born.

John 13:21-32

Not only is the Johannine Jesus in this text depicted as having the foreknowledge of which of the twelve disciples will “betray” him, the Johannine Jesus is portrayed as in a sense mandating that betrayal by saying to Judas Iscariot, “That which you are going to do, do it soon.” Various interpretations have been given to this saying within Church history. One is that Judas was predestined by God to betray Jesus so that God’s plan of salvation would be accomplished. Personally, I have never felt comfortable theologically with that interpretation. I think that a much better interpretation within the context of the Fourth Gospel is that here as throughout the Fourth Gospel, but not in the Synoptics, Jesus is portrayed as being in charge, in command of the entire situation, as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world from the beginning of the Fourth Gospel until he dies on the cross with the words in John 19:30, “All that I have come to do has been done!” The Johannine Jesus directs the orchestra, he is the producer and the director of the play, he is the coach who calls the plays on the field.

Hebrews 12:1-3

The writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews has a Christology that uses words that differ considerably from the words used by the Johannine writers. Nevertheless, the Christology is similar in many respects to that in John. For the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as in the Fourth Gospel but not in Mark and Matthew, Jesus is completely in charge of God’s salvation drama. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, Jesus himself goes into the most holy place in the Temple and offers his own blood as a sacrifice to God for sin, not for his own sin but for the sins of other people. Here in Hebrews 12:1-3 Jesus is presented as the founder, the pioneer, the one who makes our Christian faith perfect, the one who is now seated at the right hand of the throne of God.

Isaiah 50:4-9a

The ideal prophet to the writers of the Isaiah tradition is given directions each morning by the Lord God. Therefore, the ideal prophet is able to stand up with confidence against those who are evil and to help those who are in need. For those of us who are Christians, Jesus the Risen Christ is like that and even more than that. This does not mean, however, that our interpretation of Isaiah 50:4-9a is the only valid interpretation. Our interpretation was certainly not the original and was not the earliest interpretation, and Jewish interpretations will always remain valid and helpful to us, as well as valid and helpful to Jews.

Psalm 70

For anyone who is suffering distress, whether because of adversaries or because of illness, the cry to God for help at the earliest possible moment expressed by the writer in this psalm is certainly understandable. Since this cry for help contrasts with the situation of the Johannine Jesus more than it complements it, Psalm 70 would be more appropriate in a Christian lectionary when the Gospel reading is from Mark or Matthew rather than from John. Within our message on this Wednesday of Holy Week, we can apply Psalm 70 to us, but hardly to the Johannine Jesus.

John 13:1-17, 31b-35

For most of us who have been accustomed since our childhood to observe this day as Maundy Thursday and to associate this night with Jesus’ words of the institution of the Eucharist on the night when Jesus would within a few hours be seized in the Garden of Gethsemane, it seems somewhat strange that we read Jesus’ words of the institution of the Eucharist in the 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 text from the Apostle Paul rather than from one of the Synoptic Gospels. Of course, in the Revised Common Lectionary the Words of Institution (Mark 14:22-25; Matthew 26:26-29; and Luke 22:14-20) are read each year, but only in the context of the lengthy Liturgies of the Passion, one of them each year. Unless we are rigidly bound to follow the Revised Common Lectionary with no deviation, we can, of course, supplement the reading from John 13:1-17, 31b-35 of Jesus washing the feet of his disciples on Holy Thursday each year with a reading of the Words of Institution from one of the Synoptic Gospel texts each year. We would then, however, have a nearly duplicated reading of the Words of Institution from Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 within the same service.

The Johannine reading that has the Johannine Jesus washing the feet of each of his disciples, even of the feet of Judas Iscariot, may appear at first and has often been considered to be an illustration of Jesus’ humility. A more detailed study of this text in John 13, however, indicates that what the Johannine Jesus is represented as doing here is not an act of humility, but of control. Simon Peter was not given the option of refusing the washing. Neither was Judas Iscariot or any of the other disciples. Jesus also, not Peter, had the choice of how much of Peter’s body Jesus would wash. In addition in this text, the Johannine Jesus does not merely urge his disciples to love each other; the Johannine Jesus commands them to do this. As leaders in worship in the Church we are not, of course, the Johannine Jesus. We should, however, use appropriate care when we talk about humility and when we attempt to be humble, so that our actions will be genuine and not be expressions of a false humility.

1 Corinthians 11:23-26

It is essential that we look closely at the context in which Paul presents the Words of Institution of the Eucharist here. We can easily overlook the fact that Paul’s primary concern in 1 Corinthians 11:17–14:40 is not the Words of Institution. Instead, Paul’s primary concern is to command the followers of Jesus in Corinth to change the ways in which they were eating food when they were gathered together. The ones who were affluent had not been sharing their food with the ones who were poor. Apparently, even when they used the Eucharistic words, they were not participating together, but separately. Some of them were very disrespectful of others in the community of believers. Because they were not resolving these difficulties and problems, Paul sternly chided them for their behavior. He was not scolding them for their lack of intellectual understanding of the mystery of the Eucharist. He was chiding them for their segregated behavior, for not eating and drinking in the Eucharist together, for not having love for and respect for one another.

It is tragic and disrespectful to Jesus and to Paul that even into the 21st century the “sharing of pulpit and altar fellowship” is still so limited within the Church, even within the same denomination, as it is in my own Lutheran Christian denomination. If Paul, not to mention Jesus, were physically present and evaluating us today, Paul, as Paul indicated in 1 Corinthians 11:17–14:40, would chide us sternly, not because we have not achieved a single identical understanding of the mystery of the Eucharist, but because of our segregated behavior, because so many of us refuse to receive the Eucharist together with others or to permit others to receive the Eucharist with us. Many of us who are Lutheran Christians refuse to permit even other Lutheran Christians to join with us at our altars and in our pulpits, because we have decided they these other Lutheran Christians are not “Lutheran” enough, that they do not segregate themselves sufficiently from other Christians who are not Lutheran Christians. What would the Apostle Paul, whom especially we who are Lutheran Christians claim to honor so highly, say about us and our failure to honor the Church as the “Body of Christ,” comprised as Paul put it in 1 Corinthians 12 of many diverse parts (ears, eyes, feet, etc.)?

We need much more serious study of Scripture in the Church, especially of Scripture in the context of other Scripture. We need to study and to use the Words of the Institution of the Eucharist in 1 Corinthians 11:23-26 in the context of 1 Corinthians 11:17–14:40, not isolated from their context as we do in the Holy Thursday selections in the Revised Common Lectionary. It would be preferable on Holy Thursday to be using the Words of Institution in the context of their place in Mark 14, Matthew 26, and Luke 22 in successive years, not every year as they are in a secondary position in 1 Corinthians.

Exodus 12:1-4 (5-10) 11-1

This text in the Priestly tradition in which the Israelite Passover observance is commanded and which is read when the Seder meal is celebrated in Jewish homes today provides a segment, but only a small segment, of the background for the Christian Eucharist. The sacrificial slaughter of an entire yearling sheep or goat to be eaten during the course of one night by a family or two neighboring families has evolved for Jewish families today into the use of only a single bone of a lamb as a symbol of the entire lamb in a Jewish Seder. There is a lamb bone on the table, but meat from a lamb is not necessarily a part of the menu for the Seder meal today.

There is very little direct connection between the Israelite Passover observance as commanded in Exodus 12 and the bread and wine by means of which we as Christians receive the “Body” and the “Blood” of Christ in the Eucharist. There is symbolism, however, in the belief that we have as Christians that because of the death and resurrection of Jesus as the Christ in which we as Christians participate in the Eucharistic action, God “passes over” our sins and we, like the ancient pre-Israelite slaves in Egypt, are spared. It is important that we make this connection on Holy Thursday.

Psalm 116:1-2, 12-19

There are a few connections between these portions of Psalm 116 and the other texts selected for this day in our lectionary. Somewhat like the Israelite slaves in Egypt, the psalmist testifies that the Lord has set the psalmist free from that which had enslaved the psalmist, in this case a very serious illness. We as Christians can link the reference by the psalmist to “the cup of salvation” that the psalmist will raise up and will call upon the name of the Lord to the cup within the Eucharist, especially on this Holy Thursday.

Psalm 22

As followers of Jesus reminisced about the suffering that Jesus had experienced while he was being tortured and crucified by the Romans and about the significance that they saw in Jesus’ suffering for their own lives, no texts within the Hebrew religious traditions were more helpful to them in describing the crucifixion of Jesus than were the Psalm 22 and the Isaiah 52:13–53:12 readings that have been selected in this lectionary for Good Friday each year.

Followers of Jesus used the vivid details of these texts as they told and retold their descriptions of Jesus’ crucifixion in order to fill in the gaps within their own knowledge and recollections of that horrible event. Most of the portions of these two texts that could not be used in their recounting of the events during the crucifixion of Jesus because they did not “fit” Jesus’ situation were simply not used. Psalm 22, as a detailed individual psalm of lament, and Isaiah 52:13–53:12 both served well to depict what his followers concluded must have been Jesus’ inner struggles as he was dying and to depict how Jesus had suffered, even though neither of these two portions of the Hebrew religious traditions were originally intended to describe the thoughts of Jesus or of anyone else who was dying on a Roman cross centuries later.

Our Christian hymns written to express Jesus’ thoughts as he was dying develop these details even further than the New Testament texts develop them, and as we sing these hymns the words that we sing are implanted into our memory. It is important that we read the entire Psalm 22 within its own life situation before we use the Psalm in telling the story of Jesus’ passion and death.

Isaiah 52:13–53:12

Most of that which has been written about Psalm 22 above applies also to this climax of what we as Christians call the Suffering Servant Songs of the Isaiah traditions. We can, of course, merely continue to see these texts as amazingly accurate prophecies that describe in vivid detail Jesus’ suffering hundreds of years before he was crucified. We can also say that it was necessary for Jesus to suffer and to die in a specific way in order that he might fulfill these Scriptures. It will be in much greater accord with what actually happened, however, and more helpful to the people whom we serve if we suggest within our proclamation that followers of Jesus probably used details from Psalm 22 and from the Isaiah 52:13–53:12 texts as they told and retold what they understood about the death of Jesus during the decades after his crucifixion. Is this not essentially what we ourselves do when we prepare and share sermons and homilies to express our faith and to encourage other people in the development of their faith in God? We too use what we can and what works best within the religious documents that are available to us.

John 18:1–19:42

If these entire two chapters are read, the time that will be used within the service for this reading will mean that if there is a sermon or a homily these proclamations will be very brief and will probably provide very little reflection over most of the details in the reading. If, because of the length of the reading, there will be no sermon or homily of reflection at all, the impression will be given that everything written in the two chapters is simply a compilation of historical facts.

There are three segments in this extensive reading in which the narrative depicts the Jews as extremely cruel and sadistic in their insistence that Pilate order the crucifixion of Jesus. It would be admirable if we would shorten the reading somewhat by not including these three segments (John 18:28b-32; 38b-40; and 19:4-16a) in our reading. These are the three segments that are the least edifying, the least historically verifiable, and the least appropriate for Christian proclamation. It would be even more desirable to begin our reading with John 19:16b and read until the conclusion of the suggested reading with John 19:42. This is the portion of the two chapters that actually depict actions on Friday rather than on Thursday evening.

It is not surprising that when we compare the passion accounts in all Four Gospels, we see that in the Fourth Gospel Jesus speaks quite extensively, unlike the other three in which Jesus says only a few words. This is consistent with what we have seen throughout the Fourth Gospel in which the Johannine Jesus is basically in charge of the entire situation, even until he dies on the cross with the words, “It is finished,” i.e., “I have completed everything that I have come to do.”

Also, as we compare the passion accounts in all four of the Gospels, we see that although in the Synoptic accounts there are said to have been various women present at the scene of the crucifixion of Jesus, no mention is made of the mother of Jesus being there. Also, in the accounts in Mark and in Matthew it is stated that all of Jesus’ male disciples had fled, including Peter who had at least gone along to enter the courtyard of Caiaphas to attempt to see what the bodyguards of Caiaphas would do to Jesus. Apparently the Fourth Gospel presents a different scene in order that its hero, “The Disciple whom Jesus Loved,” would be shown as continuing Jesus’ responsibilities by taking the mother of Jesus into his own home, or, if the “Beloved Disciple” is a symbol or representative of the Johannine community, into its home. This Johannine story about the mother of Jesus and the “Beloved Disciple” being present during the crucifixion of Jesus is not primarily a contradiction to the Markan and Matthean accounts. It merely presents a different scene for a different purpose.

Hebrews 10:16-25

As an encouragement for those who read or hear this text to enter into the most holy presence of God, made possible because of the blood shed by Jesus on the day that for us has become a Good Friday, this text is appropriate for our use on Good Friday every year. In the words of the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, let us rejoice in our new and life-giving access to God through the “curtain” that Jesus as the Christ has opened for us.

Hebrews 4:14-16; 5:7-9

The prayers and the supplications of Jesus mentioned in Hebrews 5:7 help to bring this document somewhat closer to the depictions of Jesus in the Four Gospels. The designation of Jesus as “a ruler-priest after the order of Melchizedek” in 5:9 takes it farther away from them. We experience an echo of this “great high priest” language applied to Jesus the Christ in the Great Thanksgiving portion of our Holy Communion liturgy. There are those among us, however, who are still somewhat less than comfortable with this “great high priest” terminology in our Communion liturgy, even after many years of usage.

Finally, these texts selected for our use on Good Friday provide the setting for a general appeal for sensitivity during our Good Friday experiences. Our Jewish friends tell us that even now in this country they are at times still somewhat uneasy on this day that we as Christians designate as Good Friday. They remember the instances that their parents and grandparents have told them about verbal and physical abuse suffered by their people in Europe when after “Good Friday” worship services Christians poured out from their church buildings to attack Jews. Some of them remember the abuse that they themselves experienced within this country from Christian children who ridiculed and chased them as “Christ-killers.” There are many Christian people who do not realize that it was a Jew who was crucified by the Romans on that first “Good Friday,” and that it was a Jew who became our Lord and Savior within the process of Christian theological development. Rembrandt realized this when he asked a Jew to pose for him while Rembrandt painted his portrait of Jesus, but most other Christian artists have not and neither have most Christian preachers. Perhaps on Good Friday this year, and every year, we might remember this and in some way share the fact that Jesus lived and died as a Jew. If we do this, we might even be able to invite Jews whom we know to join with us in some way on Good Friday in our remembrance of the crucifixion of Jesus the Jew by the oppressive Roman occupation forces in Jerusalem.

Matthew 27:57-66

There are two disparate materials in this selection. The first, verses 57-61, is an expression of kindness and love shown to the body of Jesus by Joseph, a relatively rich man from Arimathea. The second, verses 62-66, depicts the chief priests and the Pharisees as gaining permission from Pilate to have guards stationed at the tomb of Jesus to make certain that Jesus’ body will remain there. The materials in verses 57-61 are edifying and appropriate for consideration on this Saturday, when we are experiencing with the early disciples of Jesus the sadness of facing the reality of Jesus’ death. There is nothing that is edifying or appropriate for our use in the second account. It and its sequel in Matthew 28:4, 11-15 are malicious polemic against the Pharisees, developed and included only by the Matthean reactors. Matthew 27:62-66 and 28:4, 11-15 provide for us in narrative form information about the animosity that developed between some of the Matthean redactors and Pharisees with whom some of the Matthean redactors were having many experiences of frustration over not being able to “convert” Pharisees to the theological position of the Matthean redactors. They provide neither historical information, nor theological information that we can use as we, together with the early disciples of Jesus, experience the sadness of facing the reality of Jesus’ death, a sadness that we should feel on Holy Saturday.

Therefore, it is regrettable that Matthew 27:62-66 and 28:4, 11-15 are included in our New Testament documents. It is even more regrettable that they are included in our lectionary. Since they are included in the lectionary, I suggest that we have four viable responses. We can read these verses and use nothing from them in our sermon or homily. We can read them and express in our sermon or homily that we regret that that are in the text and that they are in the lectionary. We can read and use only the edifying and appropriate Matthew 27:57-61 portion. We can attempt to have the hateful verses no longer included in our lectionary.

John 19:38-42

For the reasons discussed above, the use of this text is much more appropriate than would be our use of Matthew 27:57-66. Here we have the Fourth Gospel’s version of the burial of Jesus, a version that includes Nicodemus, a figure who is included only in the Fourth Gospel within the New Testament, along with the man Arimathea from the Synoptic Gospels participating in the kind and loving action of providing an honorable burial of the body of Jesus. Here Nicodemus, described in John 3:1 as a prominent Pharisee and in John 7:5-52 as urging his fellow Pharisees not to judge Jesus unfavorably without listening to Jesus, is presented as bringing a large quantity of spices to place around the body of Jesus. This is the best account within the Four Gospels to read and to use in our worship services on Holy Saturday.

1 Peter 4:1-8

The message of this text, which includes references both to the suffering of Jesus as a human being and the proclamation of the resurrection of Jesus as the Christ, is in every way appropriate for our use on Holy Saturday, the day between the death of Jesus and the proclamation of his reappearing as the Risen Christ. It is also helpful that this text includes both proclamation of the good news of the resurrection of Jesus and parenesis (guidelines for living) that are to be expected of followers of Jesus, since our sermons and homilies should on most occasions include both of these elements and not one without the other.

Psalm 31:1-4, 15-16

The thoughts expressed in these portions of Psalm 31 can be applied to the situation of Jesus on Holy Saturday, as well as to us. The psalmist expresses resolute faith in the Lord God, asks to be rescued from the “hidden net,” and commits the psalmist’s spirit into the hands of God.

Job 14:1-14

This text also is appropriate for this Holy Saturday day of death. It is said, poetically, that the human life and that the human condition is short and fragile, like a flower, like a shadow, like a river the water of which evaporates on the dry sand, unclean. When a tree is cut, there will usually be a new, vibrant, green tree sprouting from its stump. If a man dies, however, it is entirely uncertain, from the perspective of reason, whether the man will ever live again. It may be implied that God has the power to change the human condition, but that hope is not expressed here.

Lamentations 3:1-9, 19-24

In terminology similar to that in Job, the writer of this portion of Lamentations expresses the distress into which God has placed the writer. Although there is no escape from the afflictions that God has brought upon the writer, because the writer believes in the faithfulness of God and in the mercies of God that are new every morning, there is hope. So also it was for Jesus, even as he died on the cross and was dead on Holy Saturday, and so also it is for us.