Empty gestures make only noise – Third Sunday in Lent – Exodus 20:1-17/ John 2:13-25

I would like to approach this teaching with a two-pronged approach; theologically (and I will not approach it as if I am writing a doctrinal thesis) and pastorally so that we can take a thought or two home.

The cleansing of the temple by Jesus is a narrative that is found in all four gospels. Not every narrative (the wedding at Canna being a case in point) is found in every Gospel. But what is unique to John’s Gospel is that it is placed right at the beginning of the Gospel in chapter two, just after the wedding at Canna. The Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark and Luke) have this narration towards the end of their Gospels

For the Synoptics (meaning to see together, because they are similar) the cleansing of the temple was the last straw that broke the camel’s back or in this case the tolerance levels of the Jewish establishment towards Jesus. It is this incident that drove the nail into Jesus’ coffin or more precisely, into his palms and feet. In the case of John’s Gospel, it was the raising of Lazarus.

So why does John position and present this text differently? For John, the cleansing of the temple is highlighted not so much in what he does (which is a bit different in details compared to the Synoptics) but rather in what Jesus says. “You will not make MY FATHER’s house into a marketplace.” (In the synoptics it is a den of thieves).

Here in lies the revelation of Jesus as the SON OF GOD establishing his authority at a time when every Jew from the region and the diaspora poured into the temple for the Passover. Jesus was not making some petty claim in a small town of Galilee. This was him making his bold case; he is the Messiah; he is the Son of God and this is his father’s house. This was his big-ticket announcement, his first public speech and one that would send ripples throughout the Jewish faith.

Coming to the pastoral implications. The Lord is presented as all riled up and while I would love to talk about our anger issues I would rather focus on the actions of Jesus. This is not the image of the sweetheart of Jesus that we have got used to; this is the Christ setting perspectives right. Understandably, commercial activity will surround religious expressions. But when the activity overtakes the core essentials of the faith, when faith becomes mere activity, then this can best be described as a faithless business.

Too often, local customs and traditions have overtaken the core tenets of the faith. The ‘activities’ surrounding our sacramental celebrations have become untouchable and even sacrosanct while the core elements of the faith are ignored. The Church did not mandate a white wedding gown or a white communion dress. These are merely external signs of purity…though I wonder why grooms wear black? But in any case; gestures, no matter how shrouded in incense and fragrance, are rendered meaningless to our God who ‘searches’ the heart and mind. The first reading presents us with the commandments of God. If we can’t keep those, everything else becomes a sign without sincerity.

Finally, the disciples recall the scriptures in the light of Jesus’ action. His action is driven by zeal. Faith has become tepid all around, it lacks zeal from sanctuary to the street but even worse it lacks courage. Here was Christ ‘cleansing the temple.’ Is there a desire to ‘cleanse’ the Church? Will that cleansing see us marginalized and questioned? Will it cause us to be crucified? I don’t want to make Christ’s death on the cross a social or political issue; he died for our salvation. But you can’t ignore his passion for change and reform, especially if it is a broken, bruised and even more corrupt religious establishment that Christ was dealing with and we sadly are facing now.

Was the last paragraph too hard to swallow? In which case would you be comfortable with the Pharisees and religious establishment?