Sunday April 3rd, 2022, Sermon by Revd Peter Wolton

GOSPEL READING

John 12.1-8

Six days before the Passover Jesus came to Bethany, the home of Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. There they gave a dinner for him. Martha served, and Lazarus was one of those at the table with him. Mary took a pound of costly perfume made of pure nard, anointed Jesus’ feet, and wiped them with her hair. The house was filled with the fragrance of the perfume. But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (the one who was about to betray him), said, ‘Why was this perfume not sold for three hundred denarii and the money given to the poor?’  (He said this not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief; he kept the common purse and used to steal what was put into it.) Jesus said, ‘Leave her alone. She bought it so that she might keep it for the day of my burial. You always have the poor with you, but you do not always have me.’

Before thinking about the Gospel story and Judas’s comment that it would have been better if Mary had sold the perfume and given the money to the poor.

I want us to consider the bookends to the reading.

Lazarus who was raised from the dead.

And the immediate aftermath to Mary’s action.

Today’s reading continues:

When the great crowd of the Jews learned that Jesus was there, they came not only because of Jesus but also to see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. So the chief priests planned to put Lazarus to death as well, since it was on account of him that many of the Jews were deserting and were believing in Jesus.

I wonder what life must have been like for Lazarus after being brought back from the dead.

Now cast your mind back to last summer.

The date is Saturday June 12 2021.

England are playing are paying New Zealand at Edgbaston. Large crowds are allowed to attend sporting events for the first time since lockdown..

That afternoon the world’s attention suddenly becomes focussed on the Euro football championships. Denmark are playing Finland.

At 5.43pm Christian Eriksen of Denmark and Inter Milan, renowned as a world class player, receives a throw in and collapses.

Something is seriously wrong. Players form a ring around him. His heart has stopped beating. He has had a cardiac arrest. A defibullator is activated.

Fans are told not to leave. The game is stopped. A silent stadium is told further announcements will be made

At 6.32pm it is confirmed Eriksen who has been taken to hospital, is alive. Ten minutes of cardio pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) has brought him back.

At 7.30pm the match restarts.

On the last day of January this year it is confirmed Eriksen will return to football. He joins London’s Brentford. It is international news – followed by him having to do many many interviews.

He comes on as a substitute against Newcastle a few weeks later. Even opposition fans in this tribal game applaud when his name is announced.

And in this the last week he has played twice for Denmark. He scored in each game and yesterday scored again as Brentford won away at Chelsea 4-1.

It is a remarkable testament to many things.

It is a fairytale.  The media interest is huge. Eriksen has 4.2 million followers on Instagram.

People are deeply moved by the story of someone who comes back from the dead. And in the case of Lazarus, he had been very dead. There is not time to go into the questions that Eriksen has been asked about his experience. But I rather suspect that Lazarus would have had to handle many of the same questions.

It shows us, I suggest that people in the time of Jesus were not so different to us.

And I start to think that for both Eriksen and Lazarus, and their close loved ones who have been through trauma,

whilst they are profoundly grateful for their deliverance,

there is probably a side of them that wants to look forward, rather than back.

In the case of Lazarus his celebrity status brings attention from an unwanted quarter.

The presence of and interest in Lazarus is stirring things up too much for the liking of the Chief Priests. It’s a case of when organised religion feels under threat, it turns to hatred – a lesson that leaders of the Christian churches would do well to remind themselves of. 

They decide that Lazarus must be done away with. And it becomes even more imperative after Jesus ‘s triumphal entry into Jerusalem when the city is abuzz with the story of the raising of Lazarus.

Now to the Gospel story.

Could the money have been better spent? Should it have been given to the poor.

The story challenges us to consider how we spend our own money – and perhaps the Lenten season is a very good time to ask ourselves such questions.

Mary anoints Jesus’s feet. Clearly the oil is expensive. But for Mary it is a sign of her great gratitude and love for Jesus and maybe she has a sense that danger is closing in around him.

The act is one of gratitude.

The story and Judas’s reaction makes me wonder if he would have responded in the same way when hearing about our recent project here at St. George’s to beautify our church.

And yet – and yet.

Archbishop Temple in his commentary on St. John’s Gospel puts it like this:

“Yet it is also true that where lavish expenditure expresses the overflowing of heart’s devotion, it is unspeakably precious.”

What should be our attitude to expenditure that might seem lavish?

Our society depends on people exchanging money for goods and services. In the case of our church project, people have been employed putting in new lighting, recoating, putting up and taking down scaffolding, and a lady painted the stars on the ceiling. What economists call the multiplier effect has been at play, so the benefits have spread across a wide range of people.

And if we were to leave this church and observe people shopping in Bond Street, buying goods that we ourselves might not want, even if we could afford them, the same mechanism is at work.

Being British, we do not know about how people give to charity and it may be that those who have luxury cars, or jewellery or beautiful paintings also give to charities. Let us hope so. It is certainly important that they do.

As Christians, perhaps we are called to spend on our basic needs, to have, if possible, enough savings to sustain this expenditure,

and to be able to spend on non-essentials that supports others in employment and provides us with life enhancing experiences (such as tickets to watch Brentford).

and also to give to organisations that support those in need.

The action of Mary and the responses of Judas and Jesus challenge us to ask ourselves and pray about two things:

How do we best use our money?

How do we show our gratitude to and love for our Lord and Saviour?

Peter Wolton