Most
of us are familiar with the story of the widow and her two copper coins, but
perhaps less of us are familiar hearing her story in context of Jesus’s prior
words. This widow is often held up an
example, and she is, but not so much for her generosity but for her faith. She is 100% dependent on God for her life,
and her act of giving is an example of that dependence. In stark contrast to
the widow, we have the scribes, who are out to make a name for themselves.
Our story takes place after the last
word game attack on Jesus, which was by the Sadducees. All those testing Jesus were done with them,
but He was not done with them. We saw
how He wouldn’t let the issue of the resurrection be dropped. He pushed not only the Sadducees, but all
listening about the truth of the resurrection and His part in it. And then Jesus goes on to criticize the
scribes. He specifically singles them
out. We know that Jesus in the past has
been critical of the Pharisees. Now it’s
the scribes’ turn. His criticism comes in
the form of a warning to His disciples of how not to be.
Jesus’s first warning has to do with the
scribes walking around in long robes.
But wait, you might say, “Pastor LaVera, you are wearing a long robe!
That doesn’t seem like you are heeding Jesus’s warning!” Some pastors do think this way and won’t wear
any garment which would distinguish them from the laity. Some, in my opinion, dress too casually, so
that the sense of coming together in the presence of an Almighty and Holy God
is diminished. There seems to be a lack
of reverence in worship. But the
practice of clergy wearing robes dates back to the OT Law, when very specific
garments were required of the priests and Levites. These were to be worn as they were performing
their official duties. The scribes,
while scholars, were given no such instructions regarding the wearing of robes,
but they wanted to be identified with the priests. My robe was conferred upon me at my ordination
to the pastorate. You will not see me
wearing this robe outside of the context of a worship service. In addition to it being a sign of my office,
as a female member of the clergy, I have found it to be practical. Women
generally tend to be judged more strongly on appearance than men. When I wear a robe, hopefully you are less
distracted by how I look, what I’m wearing, whether or not I have gained or
lost weight, and perhaps it is easier for you to focus on what the Spirit is
saying through my words. Whether or not
it is true, it does make me a little less self-conscious. That being said, unlike the scribes, you will
never see me wearing this robe in the marketplace! There are occasions when you may see me
wearing a clerical collared shirt out in public, even at the grocery store, but
it would be because I am on my way to or from a pastoral duty in the
public. Priests and clergy from other
denominations often wear their collars all the time, because their call is to
be always on duty all the time. While I
consider myself always on call, I don’t consider myself always acting in an
official capacity as a pastor, though all of us all the time represent Christ
wherever we go and whatever we do.
Sometimes we represent Hiim better than other times, but it is important
for us to remember this.
The next three critiques have to do with
attention seeking. The scribes even
thought they deserved more honor than their parents. And while there is nothing about the duty to
give honor to religious authorities in the 10 Commandments, there is one about
honoring your father and mother.
Remember that the 10 Commandments was given to adults, not
children. Adult males in particular were
responsible for keeping them for themselves and on behalf of their
families. Now, we all want to be
respected. We all appreciate being
honored, but I hope we don’t go around expecting to be honored or acting like
we are superior to others. As Jesus told
in another warning, don’t seek out the chief seats at a banquet, but take lower
seats until you are invited to take the more privileged spots.
And then we come to a really important
criticism—“who devour widows houses.”
How did they do this? The scribes
are the lawyers. They charged fees for
legal help. Sometimes these fees were
extreme. I read that the case of the
Navy Seals who were dishonorably discharged from the service for refusing the
COVID vaccine was settled. They were
awarded $1.8 million, 100% of which went for their legal fees. So they won, but not really. They can receive now an honorable discharge
or they are free to reenlist, but as far as lost wages or time—zip. And these are mostly men still in their
prime. But imagine a widow trying to get
justice and having all her efforts go to legal fees. They also oversaw loans. If you couldn’t repay it, your property was
seized. The scribes were also known to
mismanage the estates of those widows who chose to dedicate themselves to temple
service. If you were a widow with no
heirs, you might not have anyone to take care of you, but you could dedicate
yourself to temple service and be taken care of that way. Your estate, if you had any, would be
taken. Remember Anna, the prophetess,
who met the baby Jesus in the temple? We
don’t know if her estate was mismanaged or not, but she was one of those widows
who dedicated herself to temple service.
Some
scribes charged fees for prayers. Rabbis
could not legally charge for their teaching, and many were dual career. So, pastors shouldn’t get paid, right? Some churches believe this. They use minimally or informally trained
elders who have other jobs to preach.
But Jesus was financially supported in His ministry largely by
women. We know this from Luke
8:1-3. Paul also said that the apostles
had a right to be financially supported for their work and gives Peter as an
example, even though Paul himself chose to partially support himself through
his tentmaking abilities. He writes this
in I Corinthians 9. But abuses still
happen today. I think of multimillion
dollar TV preachers who continue to seek donations and promise blessings and
miracles for such gifts. The reason I
left Grace Presbyterian was financial.
It became painfully obvious they could no longer afford me even at
half-time, but they didn’t want to fire me.
At the time, it was required that ministers who were part of the
pensions program also had to get health insurance through the denomination. That didn’t change until the 2016 General
Assembly when the Minister’s Choice program was approved, allowing stated
supply and lay pastors to accumulate pension credits without having to have
health insurance through the Board of Pensions.
This allowed me to continue serving Antioch Presbyterian Church for
another couple of years and has continued to allow me to serve churches like
Trinity.
The final critique is that the
scribes prayed long prayers for appearances sake. Keeping public prayers short is generally a
good idea, but there are certainly examples of powerful longer public prayers
in Scripture. In fact, whole communal
services dedicated to lament occurred with people praying for many hours as
well as long services of praise. But
generally, these prayers weren’t just given by one person. We have examples of saints and faithful
believers who prayed for hours, but these prayers were largely private. Whether public or private, these good
examples of long prayers were not done to put the attention on the person
giving the prayer. They were not looking
for admiration from a congregation. It
is the motivation that makes the difference in prayer, not the length.
And then Jesus gives us the
seriousness of His warning why not to be like the scribes—“for they will
receive greater condemnation.” One of
our interesting discussions last week was the intermediate states between when
Christ returns and the new heavens and new earth are ushered in, when all the
dead are raised, both believing and unbelieving—the righteous with new,
glorified bodies to live in the New Jerusalem and the unbelieving to be
resurrected and cast into the lake of fire.
The Bible does point to intermediate states until the resurrection, but
it is not clear exactly what they are.
There is an intermediate state of punishment for the wicked, and it
seems to have degrees. But it seems even
believers will be judged in the intermediate state. James 3:1 says, “Not many of you should be
teachers, knowing that we shall receive heavier judgment.” Whether the scribes were ultimately destined
for the New Jerusalem or the lake of fire, we don’t know. Probably a mix of both, but James will most
certainly be in the New Jerusalem, and yet he is aware of his accountability
for what he has taught before Jesus. Though we don’t know all the details, we
have heard again and again from Jesus Himself that what we do or don’t do
matters. And those in positions of
teaching the word of God will be judged more harshly, though not necessarily
condemned. Romans 8:1 assures us, “Now, therefore there is no condemnation for
those who are in Christ Jesus.”
Condemnation isn’t even a remote possibility for the believer.
And then the widow comes in with her
two small copper coins. What she offers
is only enough for one, small meal, but it is all she has. No one notices her, except Jesus, who points
her out to the disciples. Her giving is
both a willing gift as well as a sacrificial one. No one is compelling her to give. Who would care whether or not she kept this
paltry amount or gave it? Jesus
cares. He says her gift is greater and
more important than all. Is she an example?
I saw this week where Donald Trump is no
longer in the top 10 of the world’s richest people. His wealth is valued only at 2.4 billion and
the cut off was 2.9 billion. Still
Donald Trump could give away 80% of his assets to charity and still have more
to live off of than all of us combined plus!
His hypothetical 80% giving might not be as much of a gift as your 10%
or 15%. When you still have nearly a
half a billion in wealth, it hardly seems sacrificial. That’s not to say that giving away all that
wealth couldn’t do great good in the world, because it could if given in the
right way to the right places. But at the same time, he may or may not think
about being dependent upon God for his life.
He sure talks a lot from an “I”-centered point of view. And yet, whether or not he realizes it, he is
just as dependent upon God for his life as you or I. But God wants us not only to recognize our
dependence on God, but to live it out in faith.
Is the widow an example to us?
Her complete trust in God to provide for her and care for her, her
holding loosely to earthly things, and her willing and selfless giving are
certainly to be emulated.
This widow is also the prime example of
what Jesus condemned in the scribes. Her
house has been devoured. Jesus noticing
her is as much a lament of her state as it is praise of her faithful
generosity. If she doesn’t join temple
service, if she is not helped by the temple or others, if God doesn’t
miraculously provide for her needs, she will soon die. She has nothing left and nowhere to go. Woe to those who prey on the poor in the name
of God! The treasury was used for
various things, much of it for the building. Extra biblical sources talk of 13 different
collecting boxes, called “trumpets” that echoed when you dropped your coins
in. One was for wood, another for
incense, another for care of the golden vessels, etc. Herod’s temple wasn’t completely finished, and
as we are keenly aware, maintenance is always needed and is often costly. And there are costs occurred for the
maintenance of worship itself. Still,
some temple funds were supposed to be set aside particularly for widows and
orphans, and it was to be a priority fund, not a secondary fund. God through the prophet Jeremiah condemned
religious leaders especially and the people in general for not obeying the
God-given duty to care for widows and orphans.
In Jesus’s day, this command continued to be neglected, at least in
part.
Let’s bring it home. We have a building which we can’t
afford. We have several widows in this
congregation. I would hate to see us be
a church that spends its resources on a building over using its resources to
grow the Kingdom of God. This is not to
say buildings don’t have value, even this one.
We provide a site for the Scouts to meet. We know that there are several churches in
Havelock that have had the Scouts and don’t particularly we want them back, but
we value them as an important part of ministry.
The Scouting program is not a ministry in and of itself, but ministry
takes place in the context of Scouting as we have many leaders who are strong
Christians. Christ is modeled in the
lives of believers, in conversations with participants and in practices
incorporated. Some of these young people
would have little to no Christian witness other than through encountering
faithful Christians through the Scouting program. But is keeping a building for the Scouts the
most faithful way we as Trinity Presbyterian Church are called to be stewards
of God’s resources? Is there a different
way we can serve Scouting and do even more to promote the kingdom of God? To that end the session continues to work on
turning our property from a liability to an asset.
