The Widow's Mite: It's Not What You Have Heard
It's a preacher's dream for stewardship. Just give like this widow there. Don't hold back. Give and you will be blessed.

Mark 12: 38-42: As he taught, Jesus said, "Watch out for the teachers of the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and be greeted in the marketplaces, and have the most important seats in the synagogues and the places of honor at banquets. They devour widows' houses and for a show make lengthy prayers. Such men will be punished most severely."

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. But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a fraction of a penny. (Emphasis added.)

But wait a minute. That is not what it says. And I never thought about it until Sarah at Dylan's Lectionary Blog said this:

Where do you see any suggestion at all in the text that Jesus thinks it's a wonderful thing that this poor widow put her last two coppers -- all she had to live on -- in the Temple treasury, going away destitute?

It just isn't there. If anything, the text suggests the opposite. The passage starts with Jesus warning his followers to beware of those who like to walk around in long robes, receive the seats of honor, put on a good show of prayers, and DEVOUR WIDOWS' HOUSES.

Wow. I sure never preached it that way. I always thought it was about faithfulness and trust as embodied in that saintly widow. But I should have realized that the connection between Jesus' comment on the leaders devouring widow's houses at the start of the section with what happens next is not a coincidence. Even Mark in his rush to get to Holy Week still makes connections that help interpret and explain the passages.

Sarah makes this point quite powerfully:

Jesus watches a bunch of guys in long robes take a widow's last two coins -- all she has to live on.

Then Jesus says something. What he says boils down to "and just in case you thought I was making stuff up on that point, check out this woman -- she just put literally her last cent, all she had to live on, in the treasury to maintain this lovely building."

Oh. It's about justice and abuse of religious power. How did I ever miss that? How did I so willingly go along with the traditional, support-the-establishment (not to mention the budget) approach? Sure there is a powerful element of the widow being willing to give it all to the Temple for God. But Jesus isn't so sure that's what it's all about. Not for the leaders who have one goal in mind- the preservation of the church Temple and their power.

Not that this is all bad. I was talking with my wife about that this afternoon. There was a "budget explanation" meeting after worship at the church I attend this morning. My wife asked why I didn't stay. No reason, I said. I give to the church expecting the church to use it for the church. Most of what is in a church budget is non-negotiable. You have to pay the power company and the pastor's salary and all those other things that are there. I trust that the church will continue to spend its money mostly on itself and its upkeep.

Is that a bad attitude? No. When I give my money to Habitat for Humanity or World Vision I don't ask to attend their meetings and give my opinion on their budget. My giving has nothing to do with the church's (or anyone's) budget as such. It's about my faithfulness to my promises to God to share what I have been so richly given. The Temple Tithe in the Hebrew Bible was for the support of those who worked there and therefore couldn't go out and farm or whatever. They needed the support. The same is true today. The danger as the living parable of Jesus and the Widow's mite shows is when the leaders use the gift to the church for their power and glory.

Sarah adds:

Note that Jesus did NOT say, "Not one stone will be left on another ... unless you all are as generous as this widow. Now dig deep, people -- this building must be maintained at any cost!" Jesus doesn't criticize or blame the widow for the dynamic here; he places the blame squarely on the shoulders of the robed guys collecting the widow's money.

That's powerful. It may not preach in many places, but it is a humbling reminder.