Thoughts going in, Sunday April 3rd

John 9:1-41...

The Gospel reading for this coming Sunday is actually so long, I’ve decided to summarize it rather than cut/paste the entire text here. This is the story of the man born blind—encountered by Jesus & the disciples. They ask Jesus “who sinned, this man or his parents, that he should’ve been born blind.” Jesus responds “neither,” and then takes the opportunity to illustrate something that is a common theme in John’s Gospel: LIGHT vs DARKNESS. Way back in chapter 1 we read these words about the coming of Jesus into the world: “4 in him was life, and the life was the LIGHT of all people. 5 The LIGHT shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not overcome it.” What follows throughout the Gospel of John, then, are the detailed stories and preserved sayings of Jesus that show and prove just how it is that the LIGHT is shining in the DARKNESS.

But there’s a problem, according to John. The true LIGHT has come, but DARKNESS likes being dark. In Jn chapter 3, the same chapter in which we hear that God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, we also hear in vs 19: This is the verdict: LIGHT has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil.

And so we come to this Sunday’s passage, the story of the man BORN BLIND....BORN in darkness. He is a real person, but his situation is used by John as a spiritual metaphor for all of humanity. All of humanity is BORN BLIND, BORN IN DARKNESS, not because of personal sin or parental sin, but rather because of original sin. Original sin does NOT MEAN that every person born has the capacity to be a Hitler, or a Stalin. The same human race that has produced mass murderers and other workers of great evil has also produced great philanthropists and humanitarians. “BLINDNESS” is not a metaphor for evil; it’s a metaphor for spiritual darkness. It’s a metaphor for not being able to see God truly and worship Him above all. Yet, while all humanity is BORN BLIND, in darkness, John informs us again & again that LIGHT is here; LIGHT that is capable of ENLIGHTENING. And so, from vs 5 of Sunday’s text: [Jesus said] While I am in the world, I am the light of the world." And with that he spit in the clay and made mud...

One of the many fascinating nuances of this story is that the whole miracle begins with a conversation between the disciples & Jesus. The man himself is just sitting there. He asks for nothing, and is completely passive as Jesus puts the spit/dirt/mud gunk on the guy’s eyes. This initial passivity is heavily weighted in theological terms. Theologians call this “divine monergism,” meaning, the work of salvation is accomplished solely by God. But it should be noted that while this miracle is accomplished solely by Jesus, he uses **stuff** in accomplishing it. When I teach on sacramental theology, John 9 is a prime proof-text. The early church saw BIG-TIME baptismal themes at work in this passage which is how/why it appears on the lectionary in late Lent (looking forward as all Lenten passages do to Easter’s baptismal themes). But **part of one’s baptismal catechesis (education) is the acknowledgement that this is HOW God’s hand reaches out to us. He does so using **stuff**....ordinary things like dirt......water.......bread/wine...etc. It is essential that this truth be emphasized because the most popular expressions of the Christian religion that we encounter (radio/tv) are radically anti-sacramental. WHY, they ask, would God **need to work through the waters of baptism? WHY, they ask, would God **need to work through bread & wine? To which the Gospel of John responds: WHY would Jesus **need to use spit & dirt to heal the man born blind? Why not just say the word? ANSWER: Because he didn’t want to simply just say the word; he **wanted to use stuff. And so, in the miracle, spit and dirt were combined with Jesus’ command and promise—with only one possible result: the man was cured.
Obviously there is no “sacrament of anointing with spit/dirt,” as the Lord never commanded his church to perpetuate this action. However, it goes a long way in illustrating the theology of sacraments. It goes a long way toward explaining Matthew 28:19: therefore go and make disciples by BAPTIZING THEM...

Of course there’s so much more that could be said about the text. The man, for instance, though he did not ask to be healed, though he was entirely passive during the whole spit/dirt thing, was nonetheless an obedient respondent. Jesus told him to go & wash in a specific pool, and he did. He could’ve gone away and just wiped his eyes; he could’ve done a LOT of other things—all of which, I assume, would’ve invalidated the offer of grace in the miracle. This, too, has baptismal overtones. The grace that is conferred in baptism NEEDS TO BE NURTURED with continued obedience within the life of faith. A very thin line separates the SACRAMENTAL understanding of baptism from that of a MAGICAL understanding. Sadly, these days I think I encounter more of the latter. If baptism were “magic,” then every baby/person baptized would receive the saving grace of God and would never need to be attached to the life of faith whatsoever. And, in spite of my best attempts at teaching, I know that I have performed baptisms on people who have never attached themselves to the life of faith. Baptism is not MAGIC. It’s a sacrament. It endows the recipient with NEW LIFE, the LIFE OF CHRIST, but that life must be **nurtured. This, by the way, is also where the general Lutheran dialectic of “Law/Gospel” breaks down [Law= the bad news of what’s required that we fail fully to comply with, Gospel = the good news of what God has done for us in Christ in spite of our sins]. As, surely nurturing the life of faith (hearing the word proclaimed, partaking in the sacramental life of the church) is all Gospel, but the fact that it MUST be done is Law. Lutherans call such dilemma’s “Gospel Imperatives”....which is another way of saying “Gospel Laws.”

No doubt, part of the **original understanding of this passage was the hard line that was drawn between the Messianic community that worshiped Jesus vs the current synagogue establishment. This comes to a head in vss 28-34 Then they hurled insults at him and said, "You are this fellow's disciple! We are disciples of Moses! 29 We know that God spoke to Moses, but as for this fellow, we don't even know where he comes from." 30 The man answered, "Now that is remarkable! You don't know where he comes from, yet he opened my eyes. 31 We know that God does not listen to sinners. He listens to the godly person who does his will. 32 Nobody has ever heard of opening the eyes of a man born blind. 33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing." 34 To this they replied, "You were steeped in sin at birth; how dare you lecture us!" And they threw him out. The Pharisees draw the false distinction that THEY are the current spokespersons for Moses, when in fact, the entire story of the New Testament (specifically, passages like the Transfiguration account, etc.) point out that Jesus is the true latter day spokesperson and “prophet like Moses.” Notwithstanding, confessing one’s allegiance to Jesus, all of the Gospels warn us, will not lead to accolades, but rather, to rejection. So we are not surprised that those who love darkness rather than light cast out this newest “enlightened” person from their midst.

The passage ends very starkly: 35 Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and when he found him, he said, "Do you believe in the Son of Man?" 36 "Who is he, sir?" the man asked. "Tell me so that I may believe in him." 37 Jesus said, "You have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with you." 38 Then the man said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him. 39 Jesus said, "For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind." 40 Some Pharisees who were with him heard him say this and asked, "What? Are we blind too?" 41 Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains. On one side of Jesus, you have the man born blind, but now healed, KNEELING/WORSHIPING Jesus, and on the other side you have a group STANDING/DEFYING Jesus. In the world view of the Gospel of John EVERYONE falls into one or the other category. The Gospel is that the TRUE LIGHT has come into the world...but take note: there is NO GOSPEL behind door #2. There is no “alternative light.” Kneel in worship of him, or stand in defiance of him.