Samuel and Andrew Answer a Call

Homily for the Second Sunday in Ordinary Time

I believe that I have mentioned before that Ordinary Time, like the other seasons of our liturgical year, does have a theme that runs throughout. The readings that we will hear during this particular season all have to do with the “cost of discipleship.” There are some of you who may think that this idea of there being a cost involved signals that it is some sort of nepotistic transaction; I pay you, and you give me a position of importance and influence. We are all acquainted with this kind of transaction as it happens so often in our political world.

However, when it comes to being a disciple or follower, the payment involved is not of money or wealth. Instead, the cost of discipleship involves what it will mean in terms of how my life will have to change if I am going to follow the teachings of a master. When we speak of the cost of discipleship in terms of our faith, we are speaking of what I will have to give up in order to be regarded as a disciple or student of the Master. We are speaking of what God will want us to change if we are going to be true to the call to be a disciple.

The boy Samuel was the first-born son of a woman named Hannah and a man named Elkanah. As was common in the Jewish faith, if the first-born was male, he would be presented at the Temple and would be expected to be a student of the high priest. In today’s reading we are told that Samuel slept in the chamber of the Temple where the Ark of the Covenant was kept, the Holy of Holies. It is quite unusual that someone other than the high priest would have access to this most sacred place. There are at least two reasons why he might spend the night in this sacred chamber. He may have been there in order to tend the lamp that was kept burning before the Ark. The text itself mentions the lamp and is probably at least one reason why Samuel was sleeping there. However, we could also regard it as a cultic incubation meant to prepare Samuel to receive some communication from God. Samuel is obviously and genuinely surprised at hearing the voice.

There is a certain amount of disarming innocence in Samuel’s mistaking the voice of God for that of Eli. It is curious, however, that Eli misunderstood, not once but twice. Since the Ark was a sign of God’s presence in the midst of the people, he should have expected an occasional communication from God. It is further curious that God called the inexperienced Samuel rather than the seasoned priest, Eli. The sacred author is probably signaling that something new was happening, that a new history of the children of Israel was opening, that a new day was on the horizon.

When he finally realized that it was God who was calling Samuel, Eli directed him to ask God to speak and to assure God that he was listening with open ears and an attentive heart. Samuel did as he was directed. The Hebrew text says that God came and stood before him as he called Samuel a fourth time. In other words, this was not only a call but a theophany, an actual vision of God.

There is a clear difference between Samuel’s relationship with God before this experience and his relationship after it. Though pious, the young Samuel did not know God well; he had received no previous revelation, a fact that is reported in verse seven. This encounter was transformative; a bond had been forged between himself and God. His responsiveness opened him further, enabling him to receive the word of God and, presumably, to speak it to others. Samuel’s influence is attributed to God’s direction in his life. It was God who made Samuel’s words effective; the Hebrew text says that his words did not fall to the ground. The image comes from agriculture. Noble words, like fertile seeds, bring forth good fruit in abundance. By contrast, idle words fall to the ground and produce nothing worthwhile. Samuel heard God’s word and then he spoke it.

The Gospel passage tells a similar story, a story which uses John the Baptist’s voice rather than God’s voice in pointing out Jesus to two of his own disciples. Like Samuel, Andrew and the other disciple experience a transformative meeting with Jesus whom John has called “the Lamb of God.” By naming Jesus in this fashion, John is pointing to the future when Jesus will be sacrificed as a lamb is sacrificed in the Temple.

How are we to understand these two stories? I daresay, none of us have had such revelations or heard God’s voice so clearly. However, being a disciple or student of the Master does not have to involve a vision or heavenly voice. We know through our faith that Jesus has sent the apostles out to preach forgiveness of sins to the whole world. If we are true disciples, we will also point Jesus out to others just as John the Baptist did for his disciples. That can be done as simply as giving a good example of a joyful Christian in a world that is so broken and drifting away from God. We have the privilege of actually meeting God every single time that we receive the Eucharist. Yes, going to communion does not involve visions or voices. At the same time, our faith tells us that we are to become what we eat; namely, we are to become the Body of Christ. We are called just as surely as Samuel, Andrew, and all the disciples were called. Being true to that call is the cost of our discipleship.