24
Pentecost 27 B November 11, 2012
Hebrews 9:24-28
Mark 12:38-44
You and
I have survived another presidential election; when did it begin? 4 years ago and already someone is headed to
Iowa getting ready for 2016. And we’ve
read and watched lots of coverage about the election. And whatever news service or disservice we’ve
given our attention to, we are well aware that phrases and sayings are “loaded
with meanings.” The writers and
commentators believe that they know their audience and so they “load” their
messages and reporting with meaning. And
we know that since we share with them some common assumptions.
When the Gospels were written, you can be
sure that the writers and editors intended their writings to be “loaded with
meanings” and the readers and listeners shared some common assumptions with the
Gospel writers. The ways in which we use
a particular Gospel is loaded with meaning that perhaps was not a part of the
original meaning intended.
It is November and Every Member Canvass time
and conveniently, we have the story of this desperately poor widow giving her
last two coins into the Temple Coffers and Jesus is saying to the disciples
that she has given more than all. And
the stewardship message is that giving should be proportionate giving. Giving should be determined by how much we
have left over that enables us to live.
And of course, down-sizing and simplifying life is always a challenge or
at least using our resources in the most creative way is another way of
expressing excellence in our relationship with all of the resources of our
lives.
But we also might find that Gospel read for
today is like the obituary for a form of religious life that ended and passed
away.
The Gospel of Mark was written and edited
around and after the year 70; this was the year that Jerusalem and the Temple were
destroyed. It obviously was not written
in Jerusalem and part of the theological message of the Gospel might be a
reflection upon the end of Temple-based religion in Jerusalem.
One thing that the writers could do is
blatantly state the obvious; the obvious was that the Romans were brutal in
crushing any resistance movement. The
Gospel writers knew that the Roman Empire was there to stay; with Jerusalem
destroyed another earthly kingdom was not going to happen soon.
The writer of Mark’s Gospel is hinting at
something else. There is that suggestion
that the mainline religions of the Scribes and Pharisees were responsible for
what had happened. What was wrong with
the religion of Scribes and Pharisees?
According to the Gospel writer, the scribes were devouring the houses of
widows. That sounds like a rather harsh
judgment upon some religious leaders.
The irony of the Gospel reading is this:
The scribes in their interpretation of the laws and in writing so many
regulations were such imposing religious authorities that they had convinced
this poor widow to give her last coins to the Temple as part of her religious
obligation. How is it that she could not
see that she was free to spend the little money that she had for her own
needs? How is it that her own religion
had turned herself against herself? What
kind of religion is this?
You and I did not get to read the verses of
Mark that come after what we read today.
In the next verses, Jesus is saying that the temple will be destroyed
and not one stone will be standing upon another.
The widow’s giving her last coins in
obedience to her religious leader’s ability to turn herself against herself
represents perhaps the corrupt blindness that can come to any kind of
institution. We are put together to be a
benefit to people and we end up becoming institutions that need 100 % of our
time, talent and treasure going to the institution.
We read over and over again in the Bible that
the “Lord cares for the widow and orphan.”
The Lord cares for the poor and the broken-hearted but the reality of
the world does not always seem to support that claim. Religious institutions do not always seem to make it clear in their practices that the Lord cares for the
widow and the orphan.
The prophet Elijah intruded upon a widow in
Zarephath. She had no provisions but
Elijah told her if she would fix his meals for him then God would never let her run out
of oil and meal for her daily bread. Here again this poor widow was asked to
support the “prophetic institution” but in the case of Elijah, it turned out
that she always had plenty to eat in her support of the Prophet Elijah.
So we have stories of two widows and their
relationship with religious institutions; one received helped by her
participation and the other had her resources drained.
And what was the judgment upon the institution
that took from the widow and did not support the widow? The very end of Temple based worship was predicted.
The
widow threw her two coins for the Temple tax while Jesus predicted the very end
of the Temple. The poor widow was in an unknowing way undoing the Temple as an
institution because her very faithfulness to a policy that had her turned
against herself showed how religious, wealthy and intelligent people can
convince the poor and ignorant to engage in practices against their own best
interests. Often when one looks at
public lotteries, we have to admit that they are fatal taxes affecting most poignantly the poor
and ignorant. Intelligent people do not
waste lots of money on the lottery; poor and ignorant do and so it becomes a
practice against themselves.
In another Gospel Jesus is quoted as saying, “To
whom much is given; much is required.”
If one is given intelligence, then one can certainly use that
intelligence to mislead and trick and fool those who don’t have the same intelligence. If one has intelligence and religious
authority and the public office to require certain behaviors of people, then
much is required. And if that authority
and ability is used to trick people to do things that are not in their best
interest, then it is better that the stones of the institution that maintain
such a behavior be dismantled.
The story of the widow is a story about
judgment upon the institution. It is
also a story about us.
Where
in our lives have we been duped into practices that are not healthy for us
lives? We are paying the equivalent of
Temple taxes to authorities that have not always given us good healthy
practices for our own lives. Where are
we living unhealthy lives because of the authorities that we have submitted to
in our lives? And where are we a part
of the authority structure that unwittingly misleads about or takes advantage
of those whom the Bible says that the Lord cares for?
The widow and her two coins today are message
to us about institutional integrity and credibility today. The quest for institutional integrity and
credibility should include some questions for us today? Is it important to pray? Is it important to gather to pray? Is music important? Is it important in worship? Is it important to have someone visit the
hospital and skilled nursing centers on our behalf? Is it important to mentor children in their
faith? Is it important to bless
children? To get them started right in
life? Is it important to welcome all
people to our house of prayer? Is it
important to give counsel to people in crisis?
Is faith education important? Is
it important to have celebration and recognition of rite of passages in peoples’
lives, baptisms, marriages, memorials?
Is St. John’s important to us?
Does it have institutional credibility and integrity? Are Morgan Hill and our lives better off for St. John's being here? You notice, I did not
ask, does it have a perfect or even adequate rector? You know you can get the perfect religion of
you being alone contemplating God on the mountain without the messiness and imperfections
of others being present. You know you
can get perfect good religion and theology through virtual means. There are better sermons online than you’ll
ever get from me. You can get TV and
virtual religion without coming to church. But is virtual and religion of individualism honest to our birth into communal life?
The widow who gave her all in the Temple was
willing to give to a very imperfect institution that was passing away, because that
was the only institution which she had.
In our lives in our quest to find the perfect, we can sometimes forget
to “love the one we’re with” because that one seems too messy and imperfect as
we are always looking for the next one that is better.
Stewardship at St. John’s as we close this
year and begin the next involves simply, “loving the one you’re with.” We’re all in this place together as we seek
to have our institutional life perform with integrity and credibility towards
our ideals of loving God with all our hearts and loving our neighbor as
ourselves. Let us accept the widow’s two
coins as a commitment charge to “be here, now” with an undivided attentive
presence. Whether the walls will be
standing tomorrow, let us commit to be here now. Amen.
