38 As he
taught, he said, “Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes,
and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39 and to have
the best seats in the synagogues and places of honor at banquets! 40 They
devour widows’ houses and for the sake of appearance say long prayers. They
will receive the greater condemnation.”
41 He sat
down opposite the treasury, and watched the crowd putting money into the
treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. 42 A poor widow came
and put in two small copper coins, which are worth a penny. 43 Then
he called his disciples and said to them, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow
has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. 44 For
all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty
has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”
Year B
November 6-12November 15, 2015
Title: Waiting to Cash In
Cross~Wind
Going deeper [My Bible study]
In Mark 12:38-44 (NRSV)
We encounter two episodes in which religious practices are starkly contrasted.
This text demonstrates why all those who held traditional positions of
religious power find Jesus’ presence and preaching so disturbing. Jesus generally had a prickly relationship
with "scribes" in Mark (see 3:22‑30; 7:1‑5; 11:18, 27f.; 12:12).
Thus, it is not too surprising to find Jesus using scribes as glass‑case
exhibits of ignorant behaviors and arrogant attitudes. Taken together the two
episodes in 12:38-40 and 41-44 provide a study in contrasts. On the one hand
are the scribes, respected members of the religious community, whom Jesus
condemns for their arrogance and exploitation, while on the other is a
marginalized member of the community whom he praises for a poignant example of
faithfulness and generosity. As is the case at so many points in the gospels,
here we find Jesus inverting societal expectations of what is to be valued and
esteemed, depreciating the values associated with prestige and upward mobility
and holding in honor humility and selflessness.
In the first episode, Mark 12:38-40
contains sayings on warning against the scribes. Jesus condemns the vanity and
greed of the scribes. He points to ostentatious desire for praise and respect
that demonstrates false piety. The collection of sayings, in the minds of some,
reveals the strong anti-Jewish flavor of the church at Rome. In Matthew 23:1-36
and Luke 20:45-47 we see other examples of Jesus presenting the behavior of the
scribes as an example others should avoid. However, verses 28-34, where Jesus
affirms that a scribe is not far from the kingdom of God because he agreed with
Jesus regarding the two greatest commandments, has just shown that the
relationship was not always negative. Jesus’ denunciation of the scribes in
12:38-40 is only one of a number of instances in which hostility between Jesus
and the religious leadership comes to the surface subsequent to his arrival in
Jerusalem for the Passover celebration. The “chief priests and the scribes”
seek to kill Jesus after his provocative disruption of the activities of the
temple merchants, but their plan is frustrated by Jesus’ popularity with the
masses (11:15-18).Further, Mark in 11:27-12:27 has collected sayings that
attacked the teaching of the scribes. The “chief priests, the scribes, and the
elders” question Jesus about the source of his authority, but Jesus thwarts
their attempt to interrogate him by refusing to answer their questions until
they respond to his question about the source of John the Baptist’s authority
(11:27-33). Jesus follows up this exchange with a parable that clearly targets
these same religious leaders (12:1-12). This clash with the scribes and other
religious leaders is not limited, however, to Jesus’ visit to Jerusalem. Local
officials as well as delegations from Jerusalem had regular confrontations with
Jesus during his ministry in Galilee (e.g., 2:1-12; 3:22-30; 7:1-13). Thus, the
tension between Jesus and these leaders during the Passover celebration in
Jerusalem is the climax of a history of antagonism. Mark now collects some
sayings on the behavior of the scribes. Jesus now moves from the scribes
erroneous theology in the previous encounters to their bankrupt ethics. The scribe’s practiced air of superiority is
a result of their theology. Kings and
their courts are steeped in hierarchies.
Little wonder the scribes felt themselves worthy of respect and
admiration. The saying shows how
completely Jesus broke with the rabbis.
So who are the “scribes” that Jesus
condemns? They seem to have been important members of the Jewish religious hierarchy
in Jerusalem, and as such, they are often associated with chief priests and
elders, both of whom were members of the upper echelon of the Jerusalem
religious and political establishment (8:31; 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53;
15:1, 31). As their name suggests, the scribes were not only literate but also
proficient in writing, a relatively uncommon skill in the ancient world. Their
role in the religious hierarchy seems to have been akin to modern-day
bureaucrats. They would have been experts in Torah and its interpretation, but
also involved in the nuts-and-bolts administrative duties essential to the
political infrastructure of Roman-controlled Judea.
Verses
38-39, also found in Matthew 24:6-7 (addressed to scribes and Pharisees) and
Luke 11:43 (addressed to Pharisees), are an example of ostentation on the part
of those seeking the kind of respect paid to the scribes. 38 As
he taught, he said, “Beware of the scribes, [his concern is for their
arrogance and desire that others hold them in high esteem]. who like to walk around in long robes,[attacking
a popular style of scribal dress is an easy target, for a successful
first-century scribe wore a long linen robe with a long white mantle, a symbol
of importance and prestige, decorated with beautiful long fringes. It
identified one as a teacher or philosopher. An interesting parallel to this phrase and concern
of Jesus is a comment by Marcus Aurelius(167 AD).
… it is possible for a
man to live in a palace without wanting either guards or embroidered dresses,
or torches and statues, and such-like show; but that it is in such a man's
power to bring himself very near to the fashion of a private person, without
being for this reason either meaner in thought, or more remiss in action, with
respect to the things which must be done for the public interest in a manner
that befits a ruler. (Meditations, 1.7)
He
even shares the concern of Jesus that one could construe such action as
arrogant, and thus, one should avoid it.
and to be greeted with respect in
the marketplaces, [a fitting honor for someone of their position.
Tradition dictated that common people should respectfully rise to their feet
when a scribe walked past. Only
certain skilled tradesmen working in the marketplace were excused from this
social gesture of respect. ] 39
and to have the best seats in the synagogues [The scribe's synagogue seat of
honor placed him up front with the Torah, facing the congregation. They derive
honor in public places. The best seats
is the bench before the ark, a desirable location and visible.] and places of honor at banquets! [Jesus told a parable based on his
observation that they liked prominent seats (Luke 14:7-11). A well‑heeled host would show off
his own importance and good taste by having a learned scribe and some of his
pupils sitting in the best, most easily viewed seats. The image is people who
expect the greatest deference to be paid to them. The saying is an indictment
of a certain type of scholar, those whose piety was on parade and who insisted
on certain social advantages, such as being properly addressed and receiving
the best couches at banquets. This kind
of public performance is known in other societies among the learned who have
been deprived of political power and wealth.
The scribal parade of pomp and circumstance is a plausible setting for
Jesus’ biting criticism. The problem Jesus pinpoints is not that these scribes
are accorded deference and honor. The problem is they like it too much. They
have confused the respect intended for the position they hold with respect for
their own abilities and advancements. As
with rabbis, scribes in the first century were not paid for being scribes.
There was no such thing as a "professional" scribe or rabbi in the
sense that it was a self‑supporting activity. Thus, despite the honor their
positions brought them, many scribes were downright poor.] 40 They
devour widows’ houses [Jesus
moves beyond the charge of arrogance. The
widow without any male protection was economically threatened. Sometimes
religious leaders would manage their affairs supposedly as an act of
protection, but often as a way to make themselves richer. The precise nature of
the abuse against widows that Jesus alleges here is unclear, but presumably, it
refers to some sort of economic exploitation of the personal holdings of Jewish
widows. It was deemed an act of obedience and piety to extend the hospitality
of one's goods and services, of one's home and resources, to scribes for their
support. Jesus
condemns their lifestyle that often found the poorest and least capable further
of impoverishing themselves and their households as they attempted to support
the needs and wants of members of the religious establishment. The Law and the prophets of the
Old Testament forbid preying upon the vulnerability of widows.
19 "Cursed be
anyone who deprives the alien, the orphan, and the widow of justice." All
the people shall say, "Amen!" (Deuteronomy 27:19)
1 Ah, you who make iniquitous
decrees,
who write oppressive statutes,
2 to turn aside the needy from justice
2 to turn aside the needy from justice
and to rob the poor of my people of
their right,
that widows may be your spoil,
and that you may make the orphans
your prey! (Isaiah 10:1-2)
You shall not abuse any widow or
orphan. (Exodus 22:22)
who executes justice
for the orphan and the widow, and who loves the strangers, providing them food
and clothing. (Deuteronomy 10:18)
the Levites, because
they have no allotment or inheritance with you, as well as the resident aliens,
the orphans, and the widows in your towns, may come and eat their fill so that
the Lord your God may bless you in all the work that you undertake.
(Deuteronomy 14:29)
You shall not deprive a
resident alien or an orphan of justice; you shall not take a widow's garment in
pledge. (Deuteronomy 24:17)
19 When you reap
your harvest in your field and forget a sheaf in the field, you shall not go
back to get it; it shall be left for the alien, the orphan, and the widow, so
that the Lord your God may bless you in all your undertakings. 20 When you beat
your olive trees, do not strip what is left; it shall be for the alien, the
orphan, and the widow. 21 When you gather the grapes of your vineyard, do not
glean what is left; it shall be for the alien, the orphan, and the widow.
(Deuteronomy 24:19-21)
12 When you have
finished paying all the tithe of your produce in the third year (which is the
year of the tithe), giving it to the Levites, the aliens, the orphans, and the
widows, so that they may eat their fill within your towns, 13 then you shall
say before the Lord your God: "I have removed the sacred portion from the
house, and I have given it to the Levites, the resident aliens, the orphans,
and the widows, in accordance with your entire commandment that you commanded
me; I have neither transgressed nor forgotten any of your commandments: (Deuteronomy
26:12-13)
if you do not oppress the alien,
the orphan, and the widow,
or shed innocent blood in this
place,
and if you do not go after other
gods to your own hurt, (Jeremiah 7:6)
10 do not oppress the widow, the
orphan, the alien, or the poor;
and do not devise evil in your
hearts against one another. (Zechariah 7:10)
5 Then I will draw near to you for
judgment;
I will be swift to bear witness
against the sorcerers,
against the adulterers, against
those who swear falsely,
against those who oppress the hired
workers in their wages,
the widow and the orphan, against
those who thrust aside the alien,
and do not fear me, says the Lord
of hosts. (Malachi 3:5)
God will punish those who write
harsh laws in order to exploit the poor, including widows and orphans. The text
in Mark is general and without qualification. A plausible setting would be that
some of the scribes, employed by elites who needed their literacy skills, could
have used their position to secure a privileged lifestyle. In that case, they would not have concerned
themselves with the plight of widows and their children. Jesus denounces their
shameless profiteering at the expense of widows.] and for the sake of appearance
say long prayers. [Jesus then accuses these same corrupt and
heartless officials of offering up long, impressive prayers merely for the sake
of appearance. Jesus charged them with
exaction and hypocrisy. Most risky of all was Jesus' taking issue with the
prayer life of these scribes. He accuses them of offering long prayers to God,
not as an attempt to seek God's will or praise God's name, but as a means of placing
their superior piety on display. Divine judgment awaits sham and shame. This haunting, threatening comment is Jesus'
final public word in Mark's gospel.] They will receive the greater condemnation.”
[Jesus denies this royal ruler image of the Messiah in verses 35-37. He then declares that based on their complete
rejection of the law of love and servanthood toward others, as articulated both
by Jesus and the uncommon scribe in verses 29-34, these religious authorities
face a future not of greater honor but of greater condemnation. From this point
on, Jesus' words and lessons are directed only at the closed populations of his
disciples or accusers. It is not surprising that, after this public
condemnation of scribal behavior, the next time Jesus makes a public appearance
is as a prisoner before the court of the Jewish establishment. The animosity
between Jesus and the religious authorities almost hums. The scribes demanded
support for the temple and its worship, considered by Jesus as the equivalent
of devouring the houses of widows.]
In the second episode (12:41-44) he
points to the meager offering of a poor widow as a praiseworthy example of personal
sacrifice and generosity. The passage is
a pronouncement story concerning the offering of the widow. We also find the
story in Luke 21:1-4.
There are parallels to the story in
Jewish, Indian, and Buddhist literature.
Note the story of a rabbi who rejected the offering of a widow, but in a
dream was warned to accept it: “It is as if she offered her life.” See Leviticus Rabba iii, 107a.
The story of the widow’s mite that
follows Jesus’ exhortation against the scribes is not an illustration of rich
versus poor. The woman’s poverty does
not make her gift significant.
41 He sat down opposite the
treasury, [The
“treasury” could have been a special room in the temple or a collection box in
the outer courts. The setting of verses 41‑44 is apparently within easy sight
of this temple depository. According to the Mishnah (Shekalim VI.6), 13 trumpet‑shaped
receptacles stood up against the wall of the Court of Women that functioned to
gather the gifts of the faithful for the temple treasury. For some Old Testament
background, in the temple Solomon built, we find an incident II Kings 12,
occurring during the reign of Jehoash in Judah, from 835-796 BC.
Then the priest Jehoiada took a chest,
made a hole in its lid, and set it beside the altar on the right side as one
entered the house of the Lord; the priests who guarded the threshold put in it
all the money that was brought into the house of the Lord. (II Kings 12:9)
For some New Testament background, in John 8:20, we read
that Jesus taught that he spoke to the people “in the temple area near the
place where the offers were put.”] and watched the crowd putting money into the
treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. 42 A poor widow came
and put in two small copper coins, which are worth a penny. [The
story refers to the “small copper coin,” sixty-four of which equaled the wage
for a day. The worth of a lepton, as Mark himself notes in the text, is
minuscule, variously estimated as one‑half a Roman quadran, one‑eighth of a
cent, one‑four‑hundredth of a shekel, one‑one‑hundred‑twenty‑eighth of a
denarius, or one‑seventh of a chalkous. A lepton was cast from bronze and was
the lowest denomination Greek coin in circulation at the time. Perhaps the best
estimate of what the lepton represented for Jesus' day comes from its literal
meaning ‑‑ "a tiny thing." As tiny as this pittance was, it is
significant that the woman did have two of these coins. Note that she does not
give one and hold the other back for herself. She gives both. Since the denarius was the normal wage for a
day’s work by a menial laborer, one can calculate how small an amount the widow
contributed by converting it to a modern-day value. If we estimate the average
American laborer’s daily wages to be about $70, then the widow’s two lepta (one
quadrans) would equal $1.09. Next to the hefty contributions Jesus apparently
witnessed, such a pittance might seem laughable.] 43 Then he called
his disciples and said to them, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in
more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. 44 For all
of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has
put in everything she had, all she had to live on.” [What struck
Jesus was the percentage of the widow’s total savings represented by the two small
coins. While the rich donors offered generous gifts from their “abundance,” the
widow from her “poverty” gave everything she had, her whole “life” (12:43-44)
here does not mean “life” in the sense of being alive but rather refers to the
material possessions that sustain human life. In this case, the widow’s refers
to her savings or livelihood. Although the amount was small, in Jesus’ eyes her
gift exceeded that of the rich patrons. Given the previous reference to the
scribes devouring the income of widows, is the comment of Jesus a good thing in
that from one perspective she gave more than the wealthy, or a bad thing in
that she has nothing more on which to live. The story appears to have its point
in the statement of Jesus about almsgiving. The small sacrifices of the poor
are more pleasing to God or the gods than are the extravagant contributions of
the rich. As Paul put it:
For if the eagerness
is there, the gift is acceptable according to what one has—not according to
what one does not have. (II Corinthians 8:12)
The poor widow gave her all. This widow stands alone as the one who has
turned over to God’s uses all that she has to offer. The widow who comes to the
temple, then, is not only disadvantaged by poverty but also by her
vulnerability. She is invisible to the
legal, religious, political, and social eyes of her society, the object of
abuse at worst, pity at best. Jesus’
saying also underlies the ultimate or total nature of the financial sacrifice made
by the widow. The small sacrifices of the poor are more pleasing to God or the
gods than are the extravagant contributions of the rich.]
I think the
interpretation just given is an important aspect of the story. Yet, one can
move a different direction. After standing for centuries as an example of both
great piety and genuine sacrifice, the story of the "widow's mites"
has now been given some new and rather startling exegetical twists. Among the more recent hermeneutic tacks are
those that cast a wider eye on the context of this story. In these
interpretations, the scribes and their self‑serving ways that "devour
widows' houses" (as Jesus puts it) are seen not just as bad examples but
also as exemplars of a bad system ‑‑ a system that abuses and exploits the
poor. Those with the least labor to support the lifestyles and privileges of
those with the most. The somewhat startling conclusion reached by these
interpreters is that when Jesus observes the poor woman putting all she has
into the temple treasury, she is an unwitting pawn of an abusive system. His
declaration of "Truly I tell you" in verse 43 sounds to them as more
of a lament than a call to take notice. Here is a "widow's house"
being devoured before their very eyes. Unless he calls attention to it, his
disciples will not even see it. As
further contextual evidence to support this interpretation, scholars look to
the verses immediately following this text. The flow of Mark's text from 12:44
to 13:1‑2 suggests that readers are to view these events as consecutive. In
13:1‑2, Jesus declares an ominous ending for the great temple, the religious‑cultic
center of Judaism. Thus, the destruction of the temple and the religious
establishment that depends on it is linked to Jesus' observation of the widow's
sacrificial gift. The widow may give out of obedience, but she has chosen the
wrong recipients for her devotion. She has given her all to a lost cause.[1]
The conclusion of such interpreters is that Jesus was lamenting what happened,
based on the previous attack and on the following admiration of the Temple by
the disciples. He has condemned the
scribes for devouring the estates of widows, and now he witnesses a widow
surrendering her entire estate to the very institution that was supposed to
protect her. Certainly, her faithfulness is noteworthy, yet the position of her
story is not incidental. Her story fulfills Jesus' condemnation of the scribes
in verse 40 and immediately precedes his prediction of the temple's destruction
in 13:1-2. Yet, her gift to the temple also echoes Jesus' charge that the
temple had become a "den of robbers" in 11:17.
Introduction
A penny can hide the sun if we hold it close enough to the eye, and a
transient difficulty can shut out from a fearful soul all life' s large
blessings and all the horizons of divine will. --Harry Emerson Fosdick.
It seems that before 1982, the penny was made of copper. However, that
year, the cost of the copper required to create one penny rose above 1¢.
Therefore, since 1982, the U.S. Mint coined pennies made primarily of zinc.
That was cost-efficient until 2006 when the penny production cost rose to
1.23¢. In 2012, it costs 2.41¢ to make a penny.
At this point, we see the dilemma in making money that costs more to
make than its face value. Legislation is now considering eliminating Abe from
our coinage altogether. Australia, New Zealand and Canada have eliminated their
pennies already.
At the crossroads of metallurgy and political legislation, two cottage
financial industries have subsequently emerged. The first was penny melting.
Companies began collecting pre-1982 pennies and melting them to resell the
copper. Copper prices kept rising and scads of pennies disappeared. Business
was booming.
Copper melting proved so lucrative that illicit activities sprung up.
Thieves began stripping copper wire from construction sites and utility
connections. A 122-year-old copper bell was even stolen from Saint Mary's
Cathedral in San Francisco. The Mint had to produce enormous numbers of zinc
pennies to offset the circulation deficit created by copper penny melters. So
in 2007, laws were passed making penny melting illegal.
That is when the second penny industry emerged: penny hoarding. People
stash pre-1982 pennies away, hoping for the rumored legislation that will do
away with the 1¢ coin. At that point, penny melting would again be legal.
At worst, these stashes of pennies are worth 1¢ each – or exactly what
was paid to get them. Zero lost on the investment -- except to inflation -- if
the Mint keeps the penny or the penny hoarder loses patience and cashes out.
Joe Henry of Medford, Oregon, hits all 15 banks in his town each week,
buying up penny rolls that others turn in. Then he divides the copper and zinc
varieties using a machine that rapidly separates the pennies by weight. He
re-rolls Post-1982 zinc pennies and returns them to the bank. Pre-1982 copper
pennies get stored in buckets in the garage. It is like a redneck Fort Knox.
On a corporate scale, Adam Youngs has turned penny hoarding into a
lucrative online business -- he calls it the Portland Mint. He is a hoarder's
intermediary. Instead of tying up money waiting for legislation that would
allow him to melt pennies, he lets others do the waiting. He buys pennies by
the ton, has armored cars deliver them to his warehouse, forklifts them into an
industrial sorter, then sells them on eBay to smaller scale penny hoarders. He
will sell $100 worth of pennies for $167. While that sounds ridiculous,
hoarders anticipate turning their own $53 profit off that purchase by melting.
Youngs makes 67% profit as the middleman, and his hoarding clients stand to
make 32% profit.
The small-time hoarder like Joe Henry is better off doing his own
sorting to increase margin. That is why Youngs also sells pennies by the ton
and his clients include hedge fund managers! They are drooling to make 32% for
their investors. People will truly do anything to make a buck.
By the way, today, the nickel is
also worth more melted down for its metal.
By the way, it is illegal to melt
down any coin for its metal.
I learned the previous two bits of
information from an article in Market
Watch in July 22, 2007, by Chuck Jaffe, in a regular column under the
by-line, “Stupid Investment of the Week.”
In other words, please do not try
this! If you want to collect them for amusement, fine, but if you do so as an
investment, prepare for disappointment.
Maybe we need to consider the penny as an analogy to a spiritual truth.
In Pilgrim at Tinker Creek,
Annie Dillard has just finished telling her readers about a childhood game of
hers in which she would hide pennies for other people to find -- emblematic of
her later work as a writer -- when she moves on to reflect on the significance
of seeing (or failing to see) discarded pennies on the ground:
"It
is still the first week in January and I've got great plans. I've been thinking
about seeing. There are lots of things to see, unwrapped gifts and free
surprises. The world is fairly studded and strewn with pennies cast broadside
from a generous hand. But -- and this is the point -- who gets excited by a
mere penny? If you follow one arrow, if you crouch motionless on a bank to
watch a tremulous ripple thrill on the water and are rewarded with the site of
a muskrat kit paddling from its den, will you count that sight a chip of copper
only, and go your rueful way? It is dire poverty indeed when a man is so
malnourished and fatigued he won't stoop to pick up a penny. But if you
cultivate a healthy poverty and simplicity, so that finding a penny will
literally make your day, then, since the world is in fact planted in pennies,
you have with your poverty bought a lifetime of days. It is that simple. What you
see is what you get."[2]
Application
From the narrative of the widow and her pennies, several themes emerge
that we should consider today.
Frist, we should consider that abundance is subtle.
Jewish religious leaders were not a horridly corrupt lot -- we must be
fair. They were religiously zealous in an increasingly pluralistic culture.
However, it is possible they came to enjoy their position of power and
privilege to such a degree that they lost a sense of religious and spiritual
purpose. Jesus' indictment of them shows that they loved abundant status,
abundant comfort and abundant deference from those around them. This story begs
us to look thoughtfully for abundance in our lives. We must start from
awareness, and then talk to God and others about what to do about the abundance
we inevitably discover.
Pennies From Heaven is a 1936 film starring Bing Crosby (not to be
confused with the 1981 Steve Martin film, that shares only the title). The
film's story -- of flawed but well-meaning people trying to do the right thing
and stick together amid adversity -- has been largely forgotten, but the title
song, emblematic of the Depression Era, has endured as a jazz standard. Pennies
From Heaven is also of historical significance because it was one of the first
films in which an African-American -- jazz musician Louis Armstrong -- was
given major billing. This was at the insistence of Crosby.
The song's lyrics reflect on how the pre-Depression world had forgotten
how "the best things in life were absolutely free." Because no one
appreciated marvels like the blue sky and the new moon, "it was
planned" (presumably by God) "that they would vanish now and
then."
You had to buy them back -- but with what?
"Pennies from heaven" is the answer:
That's what storms
were made for
And you shouldn't be
afraid for
Every time it rains,
it rains,
Pennies from heaven.
Don't you know each
cloud contains
Pennies from heaven?
You'll find your
fortune's falling
All over town.
Be sure that your
umbrella is upside down.
Sure, the song's message sounds Polyanna-ish, but in the darkest days
of the Depression, it was comforting to think that God might still send the
occasional penny our way -- a small, but tangible blessing, symbolic of much
more significant blessings yet to come. (A penny was still worth a little
something back in that day, but still it was not very much.)
The whole idea is reminiscent of a biblical story, that of the manna
that sustained the Israelites in the wilderness. They could not hoard the
stuff, because it would spoil. They had to depend on its daily arrival (with
double portions graciously provided on the day before the Sabbath, so they
would not have to work picking it up).
If God's daily blessings are indeed waiting to be harvested, there is
something to be said for "keeping your umbrella upside down."
Ironically, unclaimed pennies are far more likely to be discovered on
the sidewalk these days than they were in the 1930s. Are we really so wealthy
that we can afford to just pass them by, hoping for a hundred-dollar windfall
instead? Or have we forgotten the simple wonder of finding happiness in the
little things in life?
Second, we should consider that money is a barometer.
Mark wants us to see a deeper agenda than money we put in the offering
plate; hence, his attention to comparisons. He wants us to see giving as a
barometer of our internal devotion to God and God's kingdom.
As a parallel issue, consider Jesus' words on words: "It is out of the abundance of the heart that
the mouth speaks" (Luke 6:45). How should we apply this -- avoid
slander, stop cussing and do not gossip about others, or examine the broken
desires of the heart that give rise to these behaviors? Tend to the latter, and
the former will change.
Giving is the same way. The abundance of the religious is contrasted
with the abundance of the widow. Giving is simply an external demonstration of
internal brokenness or virtue.
The point here is not necessarily to give more. Maybe we need to give
less and provide for family or radically reduce personal debt so we can give
more, healthier and for a longer time. Maybe we do need to give more and give
creatively. Nevertheless, those issues are secondary, not primary. What Jesus
seeks is heart transformation. Become the widow. As one pastor puts it,
"Change your money and it may change your heart. Change your heart and it
will change your money."
Third, we should consider that attitude trumps appearances.
The comparisons among the three "characters" of this passage
are striking. The religious leaders and rich givers look great on the outside
-- they possess the cultural appearance of importance and standing.
Nevertheless, their heart conditions show their true appearance to be thin and
wanting. In that light, they were not much different from the Israel of the Prophets.
"These people draw near with their
mouths and honor me with their lips, while their hearts are far from me, and
their worship of me is a human commandment learned by rote" (Isaiah
29:13).
On the other hand, a widow was a cultural outcast in the first century.
Widows shared a marginalized standing with lepers, the poor, tax collectors and
prostitutes. Yet with a heart devoted fully to God, the widow has a lot to
teach us. This nameless, penny-less woman without a family has become an
historical metaphor for generosity, dependence, sacrifice and priority.
Conclusion
As we set our own values, priorities and lifestyle choices, we might
remember God's words to Samuel: "For
the LORD does not see as mortals see; they look on the outward appearance, but
the LORD looks on the heart" (1 Samuel 16:7). We may look acceptable
to society or even Christian subculture, but our attitudes are the reality. Our
inner motivations. What we feel. What we think but don't dare say. These all
trump the outward gestures that people may observe.
This appearance vs. reality paradigm comes all the way back to our
penny hoarders. These devoted savers probably look like fools to many who scoff
at the penny. But they are investing into their future -- a no-risk situation
in hopes of a windfall.
Christians are not called to hoard pennies, but to
give them away.
[1] (For some intriguing
discussions of this rather trendy interpretation, see Addison G. Wright, S.S.,
"The Widow's Mites: Praise or Lament ‑‑ A Matter of Context" CBQ, 44,
1982, 256‑265; Elizabeth Struthers Malbon, "The Poor Widow in Mark and Her
Poor Rich Readers," CBQ, 53, 1991, 589‑604; R.S. Sugirtharajah, "The
Widow's Mites Revalued," The Expository Times, 103, 1991, 42‑43.)
[2] --Annie Dillard, Pilgrim at Tinker Creek
(HarperCollins, 2007), 17.
No comments:
Post a Comment