Mark 12:38-44
38 As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, 39 and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. 40 They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. These men will be punished most severely."
41 Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. 42 But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny. 43 Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, "Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others. 44 They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything--all she had to live on." (TNIV)
As I go in to this week and having studied this reading now for a few days in a row, several things pop out at me. In vs 38 “as he taught…” the Greek word used there is “didache.” To coin a term, this could be translated: “as he catechismed.” Meaning, when the word didache is used, the emphasis is that what follows was a regular, core component part of Jesus’ instruction. Thus, I find it interesting that Jesus apparently stressed the hypocrisy of the teachers of the Law to his disciples as if it were part of his catechism to them. Perhaps this was to counter any [future] inadequacy they may feel regarding their own ability to “teach the Law” in the days ahead following the Lord’s return to Heaven.
Another thing that strikes me about this passage is that it really seems like 2 discreet matters sort of joined together by the Gospel’s author. Other than the presence of the word “widow” in vs 40, part 1 (38-40) doesn’t seem to have much to do directly with part 2 (41-44).
A final problem with the text has to do with the nature of Jesus’ comment regarding the widow’s offering. It’s very interesting to read the commentaries on this. Most of the older ones extol the virtues of the widow for her faith, her willingness to sacrifice etc. In short, they see Jesus words as commending the widow to us as an ultimate example of virtue. Newer commentaries, however, are very quick to point out that Jesus never actually compliments her; he simply points out a truth with no attached value judgment. This causes the newer commentators to speculate that the widow is actually a “victim” in this instance—practically in the same manner as today’s widow who has only her social security check to live on, and yet she sends regular checks to a crooked televangelist.
OBVIOUSLY….it makes a difference as to which way one should go with this text. If the widow is an ultimate example of faith, it gets preached one way; if she’s the victim of a crooked & manipulative religiosity, it gets preached a totally different way.
Cheers,
TM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
What is she giving to? To help the needy? or to buy the priests luxury? I believe Jesus is just saying that she gave more because of the % of income.
From what the historians tell us, it's difficult to know for sure what the 'treasury' is in Mark 12. Here's a quote: "It is unclear whether Mark means the temple treasury itself, where a priest would announce the gift and the purpose for which it was given, or any one of the 13 trumpet-shaped receptacles against the wall of the Court of Women." Other sources tell us that these receptacles had different designations.....some were for purchasing this or that type of sacrifice, etc. etc. Also, just like today, I think it would be difficult to separate the funding of the NEEDS for worship, vs the funding of the LIFESTYLES of the top-echelon worship leaders. I'll never forget reading something from Garison Keillor where he expressed the sentiments of church giving he grew up with (as a Protestant). He said that in his church they knew that their offerings were going to send missionaries out to preach the Gospel in far flung lands, where as the money given in Roman Catholic churches was going to buy diamonds for the Pope's shoe laces.
Typical Garrison Keillor humor, but in the case of the Temple's treasury (all of it), I'm betting it was difficult to say whether a given drachma was going to go to buy fuel for the lamps or "diamonds for the high priest's shoelaces."
Certainly, I would agree that Jesus is saying that from a % perspective she gave more. After having wrestled with the text all week, I'd say that one of the key points is that HE NOTICED. I think that even as Christians who like to try to be non-self aggrandizing etc., it's NICE TO KNOW that our Lord notices our sacrifices.
cheers,
TM
Post a Comment