Homily for 5th Sunday of Lent Year C

In this last Sunday before Holy Week, we take a little rest from the Gospel of Luke and look at an incident from the Gospel of John, but it, too, is something which is in the same thematic vein that we have been looking at this Lent.  There is a little bit of problem with the actual story, however, for it does not appear in the earliest texts we have of the Gospel of St. John, and it has even shown up in texts of Luke’s Gospel as well.  In any case, the story was accepted as canonical, and the story is one that has captured the imagination of people for centuries. It could be that the story of the woman caught in adultery may have been taken out of many editions because Jesus seems to go so easy on sin in this passage.

Last Sunday we read the parable of the Prodigal Son. It is the story of the two bad sons of a good father. The younger son lived a bad life, then realized his waywardness and returned to the embrace of his father. The elder son lived a law-abiding life, but ended up outside the father’s house and absent from the big feast of the fat cow he had helped to raise. Which of these two sons can we compare to Saul, who later became the apostle Paul? Many of us will quickly answer, “the younger son.” Paul lived a wayward life and then experienced a total conversion to the ways of God, right? Wrong. Paul never lived a wayward life? Right from his youth he lived a strict religious life. As he said before the tribune in Jerusalem, “I am a Jew ... brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, educated strictly according to our ancestral law, being zealous for God, just as all of you are today” (Acts 22:3) No, Paul was not wayward at all. He was a religious Jew of strict observance. He was like the elder son in the parable of the Prodigal Son, who was always law-abiding and intent of doing his father’s will.

Paul’s conversion was not a change from a life of waywardness to a life of discipline. It was a conversion from one form of righteousness to another form of righteousness. The younger son in the parable needed a conversion of the unrighteous, to return to the father’s house. The elder son needed a conversion of the righteous, from self-righteousness to true righteousness in Christ or, as Paul describes it in today’s second reading, “not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but one that comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God based on faith” (Philippians 3:9). This is the kind of conversion that Paul had. Which goes to show us that, whether you judge yourself to be righteous or you judge yourself to be unrighteous, we all need a conversion, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

Which is better, the self-righteousness of the law-abiding Pharisees or the unrighteousness of the tax-collectors and sinners? You know the answer. Jesus was harder on the self-righteous Pharisees than he was on the sinful tax-collectors and prostitutes. Don’t get me wrong. Both the Pharisee and the tax-collector have gone astray and wandered from the path of true righteousness. But whereas it is easy for sinners to recognize their sinfulness and turn back to God, it is very hard for the self-righteous to recognize that they too are in error. This is because when they compare themselves with others they say, “I am not doing too badly, after all. I am better than most people.”

How can we tell when we are entangled in the sinister web of self-righteousness? The test is pretty simple: How tolerant are you of those you perceive as sinners? Are you an easy person lo live with? Jesus was an easy person to live with. But look at the self-righteous elder brother of the prodigal son. He was so intolerant of his “sinful”junior brother that he walked out on him, on his family and on the feast. Look at the life of the rabbi Saul before his conversion. He was so intolerant of those who had left the synagogue and joined the Christian church that he was prepared to kill. He unleashed a campaign to visit suffering and death on Christians who, he believed, were messing up the good, old religion that came down from their ancestors. But when he converted and came to Christ, he realized that the sign of true zeal for the faith is readiness to die for one’s beliefs, not readiness to kill for one’s beliefs.

From then on Paul’s goal became, “I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the sharing of his sufferings by becoming like him in his death” (Philippians 3:10). Paul, the killer of Christians, would one day give his life to die as a Christian. He had attained his life’s goal to suffer and die with Christ. This, brothers and sisters, is true righteousness

There is a little known sidelight to the story of the woman taken in adultery. After the Pharisees drag her before Jesus for sentencing and Jesus says, "Let anyone among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her," a stone comes flying through from the crowd. Jesus looks up, frowns slightly, smiles a little, and says, “If you don’t mind, mother! I am only trying to make a point here.” In one way this is a good joke because it shows the natural tendency of good people, like the Pharisees, to throw stones at those they consider sinners. In other ways it is a bad joke because it tries to paint sinless Mary in the colours of sinful humanity. The last person who would want to throw a stone at the woman caught in adultery would be the Blessed Virgin Mary, God's most favoured one. According to the joke, Jesus says he is trying to make a point here. What is the point that Jesus is trying to make? Why would the church give us this story for our spiritual nourishment on the last Sunday before Holy Week when we commemorate the suffering and death of Jesus on our behalf?

The story of the woman caught in adultery had a very curious history in the early church. Many ancient bibles do not have it, some have it as part of a different chapter in the Gospel of John, and still others have it as part of the Gospel of Luke. Some scholars think that, originally, this story could have been part of Luke's Gospel. This is because it reflects themes that are dear to Luke, such as, concern for sinners, interest in women, and the compassion of Jesus. The fact that it is missing in some early bibles and found in different locations in others suggests that some early Christian communities had removed this story from the Bible. When later Christians tried to put it back into the Bible, they were no longer sure of its original location.

Why would anyone want to remove this story from the Bible? There are people who cannot understand why Jesus would sympathize with a convicted adulterer. After all, it is decreed in the Bible that such offenders should be put to death (Leviticus 20:10). Does this not seem like an obstruction of justice? Remember the case of Karla Faye Tucker, the self-confessed, repentant murderer who was executed in Texas in February 1998. Many Christian organisations, including the Vatican, had pleaded for her pardon. Yet the execution was carried out. Supporters of the death penalty argued that no one should interfere with the course of justice. Well, Jesus just did. There are people who think that compassion and leniency are a sign of weakness. These are probably the kind of Christians who tried to suppress the story by removing it from the church's Bible.

How could Christians read these marvellous stories of Jesus’ compassion and still take a hard-line stand with regard to the correctional services? The answer lies in how one reads. Some people identify themselves with the Pharisees when they read the story. Their interest is how to deal with other people who break the law. Their answer is usually that justice should be allowed to run its due course. Now you can begin to understand why the medieval church did not see anything wrong with burning “convicted” witches like Joan of Arc on the stake. Didn't the Bible say that no one who practices sorcery should be allowed to live (Leviticus 20:27)? That is the law, that is justice. Our only duty is to implement it.

But when we read the story, identifying ourselves not with the Pharisees but with the woman herself, then we begin to see the story for the good news that it really is. Like the woman, we “all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Like her we all deserve death, “for the wages of sin is death”. (Romans 6:23). But when Jesus comes into the picture, he overturns our death sentence. He sets us free with his words of absolution: “Neither do I condemn you. Go your way, and sin no more” (John 8:11). The story shows how Jesus stands up for sinners before the law. In so doing he draws upon himself the hostility of the hard-line officers, who will eventually arrest him and give him a taste of their justice. The church puts this story before us today so that we can see ourselves in this sinner woman whom Jesus saves from sure death at the risk of attracting death to himself.

What we have in the Gospel today is really two tests or trials side by side.  The Pharisees are testing Jesus. That is their motivation for bringing the woman to him.  You see, it was written in the Law that a woman accused of adultery by two eye witnesses should be stoned to death. However, the Romans had taken away the Jewish rights to capital punishment. They were not allowed to kill anyone or they would be going against Roman law. They were able to bring the woman to Jesus because Jesus  was seen as a prophet, and thus able to give God’s judgement on a person.

The social context is also important here.  Adultery was seen as an affront to the honor of the man. This was a male dominated society. Women were mere possessions.  As we know today, it takes two to commit adultery, but the Jewish laws were only against women. It was felt that women were not able to control their sexual urges and that it was up to the men to protect their daughters, sisters and wives from their weaknesses.

However, let us look at the two choices that Jesus had – the test that was put to him by the Pharisees.  If Jesus says the woman should be stoned according to the Law, then the Romans would have something to charge him with and he could be reported to them for criminal wrongdoing. On the other hand, if he said the woman should be set free, then he would be discredited, – he could not be the promised one, because he spoke against Torah and was not following the Law and the prophets. Either way, Jesus could not win. But the Pharisees would be happy either way.

Jesus responds by not responding.  He doesn’t say a word. Mediterranean people, by the way, liked these types of problems where it seems there is no getting out, and yet someone manages to escape from the trap. In this story Jesus could be a philosophic Indiana Jones! He bends down and starts writing with his finger.  A lot of paper has been used by people trying to explain what Jesus might have written down. One source that I read, however, said this was a common Mediterranean trait that when they were thinking they would doodle on the ground with feet or with hands.  So maybe he was writing nothing – just doodling!  On the other hand, when he does say something finally, he challenges the motivation of the group that brought the woman to him. “Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw the stone at her.” Jesus is trying to get at the reasons that they want the woman dead – is it just to get back at Jesus? Has this been a trap for the woman because the husband wants to get rid of her? The Pharisees actually saw themselves as strict followers of Torah and quite sinless, so they are left here to question their motives for bringing the woman to Jesus. The oldest members of the group are the first to recognize how Jesus has played the trump card. They are the first to react.

In any case, the surrounding people do think about their motives and the fact that their motives may be sinful as well, and one by one they leave the area, till Jesus is alone with the woman. After he had given his statement, however, note that he again went down on the ground and wrote. Was he just doodling and passing the time? Tradition says that he was writing down the sins of the spectators. That is hardly likely, however. Some say the writing was simply symbolic and reminiscent of Jeremiah’s statement that those who forsake the Lord shall be ‘written in the earth.’  As I say, we are not told what was written, if anything, and will never know for sure, so it is a waste of time to surmise. The important thing is that the woman and Jesus are left alone.

When Jesus asks the woman if there is no-one left to condemn her, we recall that there had to be two witnesses to the crime of adultery before one was condemned. So, she is basically free by that fact. Jesus’ words “Neither do I condemn you” do not imply that Jesus sees himself as a judge. A few verses later after this story Jesus tells us “I judge no-one”. What Jesus was saying is simply that he was not an eye witness either. Nor is he implying that the woman didn’t do wrong.  What he is asking her to do is put the past behind, in other words forgiving her of her sin, and asking her to strive for purity in the future. Jesus’ compassion and mercy toward the woman is able to free her to go and live a better life.

Jesus offers us that same compassion and mercy.  Jesus does not expect perfection of us, he expects us to strive for perfection. In the past I have often heard many preachers who, speaking of sexual morality, became loud and harsh and condemning. They seemed to be throwing their own stones at us. The image of Jesus, though, is one of kindness and hope with the woman.  He doesn’t say that the woman didn’t sin, but that he doesn’t condemn her and at the same time saves her from those who would.  He simply asks that she try harder not to sin.

During the last part of Lent, I want you to keep this image in mind.  If you have been following what I have been suggesting, you have been spending some time thinking about the direction of your life, thinking about those things which cause us problems, and making an attempt to repent, turn around, and try a different path.  Isaiah describes it today when he says “I will make a way in the wilderness”. Today we see Jesus telling us not to get depressed about our past sins and failures, but to get up and try a little harder. Try not to sin again. As St. Paul tells us today: “…press on toward the goal.” Both Jesus and Paul are rather like a coaches today who pick up their players and try to motivate them to do the best they can and be the best they can be. Jesus preached a lot about social concerns and our need to be focused on others, but that can’t happen till we have come to grips with ourselves first. It is Paul”s idea of forgetting what lies behind and straining forward to what lies ahead.” This is the same message Jesus was giving to the woman caught in adultery. And today Jesus gives us the strength and the motivation to go forward.  The prize is, as Paul tells us, “the heaven;y call of God in Christ Jesus. Let us then rejoice in his mercy and love.

This story, therefore, is a fitting preparation for Holy Week when we see Jesus making the ultimate sacrifice to grant us clemency, we who are already sentenced to death by our sins. As we prepare for Holy Week, let us thank Jesus for his mercy and love. And let us promise him that we shall commit ourselves to doing exactly as he tells us: to go and to sin no more.

  By Rt. Rev. Bishop Kasomo Daniel. PhD.D.Sc.

Bishop Kasomo Daniel is a Roman Catholic Bishop of the Society of St. Peter and Paul (SSPP).