Homilies

Back to Homilies menu

The action in today’s first lesson (2 Kings 18:17-19:7) occurred in the year 701 B.C., but the story is told so vividly that we can almost imagine ourselves on the city walls with the defenders of Jerusalem.  We see the Rabshakeh standing off at some distance, with a detachment of the powerful Assyrian army behind him.  His shrewd propaganda speech threatens to have a deadlier effect on the morale of the city’s defenders than the swords of the Assyrians.

The Judean officials ask him to speak in Aramaic (18:26), the language of international diplomacy, lest his challenge be heard by the civilian population.  But this only incites the Rabshakeh to press his argument with greater force.  He tells the people that they are fighting for a lost cause.  Their only hope is to discard Hezekiah and surrender unconditionally to Sennacherib (18:28-35).

But now comes a surprise.  The prophet Isaiah, who had earlier proclaimed Assyria to be the rod of God’s anger (Isaiah 10:5), now counsels the people against capitulation!  God’s purpose is not to eradicate Jerusalem but to build a new Jerusalem on the foundation of a righteous and faithful remnant.

Do not be afraid because of the words which you have heard, for I will put a spirit in the king of Assyria, so that he shall hear a rumor and return to his own land, and I will cause him to fall by the sword in his own land (19:6-7).

This account of war in the ancient Near East makes us think of what is going on in that region today.  Never has there been a clearer illustration of the saying that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.  American intentions to bring Western style democracy to a part of the world which has never known it have opened up a hell which is seemingly without end, and there is no Israelite prophet to proclaim a miraculous reversal of fortune.

Those who know the Middle East say that what is needed there is not democracy but stability, and even the shrewdest modern-day propagandist would have difficulty persuading anyone that the Middle East is more stable now than it was before the toppling of Saddam Hussein.

How it will all end, God only knows, but even if, by some miracle, it should end well, I still could not bring myself to admit that the end had justified the means. 

Our second lesson (John 13:21-38) illustrates how little correlation there may be between what we intend and what actually comes about.  When Judas takes the morsel from Jesus’ hand, the Lord says to him, “What you are going to do, do quickly!” (v. 27).  The traitor departs at once, “and it was night” (v. 30). 

But in spite of the heinousness of Judas’ intent, the death of Christ, which his action will facilitate, has led, according to Christian belief, to the redemption of the world, so that the recently discovered Gospel of Judas may not be so far off the mark in representing Judas as having acted in accordance with Jesus’ own wishes. 

By contrast, the confident promise of Peter, the prince of the apostles, that he will lay down his life for his Master (v. 37), will lead, in the short term, to denial and betrayal. (v. 38; cf, John 18:15-27).

June 25, 2006

back to top