A Closer Look at the Widows Offering

7/31/2019 A Closer Look at the Widows Offering

1/11

JETS 40/1 (March 1997) 2 7 - 3 6

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE WIDOW'S OFFERING:MARK 12:41-44

G E O F F R E Y S M I T H *

The story of the widow's offering as found in Mar k 12:41-44 has longprovided the Church with an example of humble devotion to the Lord. Fur-

ther, it speaks to the people of God about the true nature of giving. Calvinconsidered th is accoun t as providi ng "a high ly useful doct rine , t h a t wha tever men offer to God ought to be estimated not by its apparent value, butonly by the feeling of th e he ar t, and th a t the holy affection of hi m who,according to his small means, offers to God the little that he has, is more

worthy of esteem t h a n that of him who offers a hundred times more out of his abundance." 1

The careful observer, however, will note a second theme in this accountof the widow that intersects with the standard interpretation of the text.The second th em e is th e coming ju dg me nt upo n th e na ti on of Is rae l. It is anunderlying theme throughout Mark's gospel: The days of covenant-breakingIsrael are numbered, and all that remains for what is left of the theocracy is covenant curse. As the gospel narrative moves forward, evidence for God'slawsuit against his people accumulates (culminating in Israel's leaders mocking and ins ul tin g the Mess iah du ri ng his agony on th e cross [15 :31-3 2; cf.12:1-12]). Simultaneously Mark has sprinkled a variety of hints (in the formof non-Israelites approa ching Jes us with only their faith) th at anti cipa te th e

saving reign of God transcending Israel's frontiers into the world of the Gen-tiles (culmi nati ng in the [Ge ntile] cen tur ion 's confession at t he foot of th ecross [15:39]).

Against this broader backdrop of redemptive-historical birth pangs it isappropriate to inquire as to why the account of the widow's "mite" appears

where it does. Af ter all , the preceding verse (12:40) concludes Jesus' publicministry in Mark's account. 2 Is this a simple postscript? Is it one final lessonconcerning the nature of true faith and piety, added to reinforce lessons pre

viously given to the disciples? Given the placement of the pericope, coming asit does betwee n t he record of Je su s' public min ist ry a nd the Olivet discourse,

we should not hes i ta te to probe the account more deeply in order to see what


2/11

28 JOURNAL OF THE EVANGELICAL THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY

The unmasking of the scribes' hypocrisy in 12:40, which exposes them as aruling class who exploit Israel's religion as a means to sordid gain, stands instriking contrast to the devotion of the widow. While the scribes use the pretense of religion to gain money, the widow's piety is expressed through her willingness to give moneyeven if her giving exh au st s all of he r resou rces.She possesses wh at God loves: faith. Sh e believes he will meet all of her needs.

Thus the brief account of the widow's offering is str ate gic all y in se rt ed between the condemnation of the sc ribes and Jesus ' announcement of thetemp le's dest ruc tio n. We are able to see a th em at ic bridg e betw een scriba l avarice and the pro nou nce men t of ul ti ma te curse on th e nat ion : Will God abandon Israel and destroy his dwelling place, the temple? 3

According ly it is the intent ion of th is s tudy to examine the account of the

widow's offering on two l eve l s4

in order to reveal the convergence of the twoseparate (but related) themes into one. Therefore we will attempt to understand both the meaning of the pericope itself (i.e. th e lesson Je su s wa nt edhis disciples to learn) as well as Mark's purpose for placing it where he has(i.e. why he selected this account in the arrangement of his material and

wha t the signi ficance of its location within the na rra t ive is) .In order to understand the pericope itself we must first examine the

pre cedi ng conte xt (12 :38 -40 ) wi th special emph as is on v. 40, which provid esthe tr an si ti on al point to 12: 41-4 4. These are the final words of Je su s' publicministry that Mark records, spoken in the temple. They contain a harsh denunciation of the scribes in the form of a warning to the listening multitude(v. 37).

The cond emna tion of th e scribes is pr ima rily concerned wit h th ei r preoccupation with the mere appearance of godliness. The extent of their faithruns no deeper than religious displays: flowing robes, respectful greet ings,seat s of honor in th e synagogue and at ba nq uet s. Bu t Je su s singles out oneparticular sinister activity of the scribes that reveals the horrendous natureof their hypocrisy: They devour widows' houses, covering up their crimes withstill more superficial pietytheir long prayers. 5

It is not know n exactly wh at th e na tu r e of "devour ing widows' hou ses " was in J esus ' t ime. Nei ther are the details of th is practice delineated in theBiblical text. Scholarly opinion is divided. Leon Morris suggests that someof the scribes "encouraged impressionable widows to mak e gifts beyond their

3 Lane does see this as a transitional passage, moving from the denunciation of the scribes tothe Olivet discourse His view of the transition, however, is spatial and temporal only, a "sequenceof movement" from the court of the women to departure from the temple precincts He does notaddress a potential theological motive in Mark's arrangement of his material (Lane, Mark 442)

4 In using the language of two levels I do not wish to imply that there is a surface meaning and


3/11

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE WIDOW'S OFFERING 29

mean s," an expl ana ti on t h a t fits into the context of gift-giving to tea ch er s,who were forbidden to charge for their teaching. 6 T. W. Manson is more specific, believing t h a t thi s prac tice referr ed to th e mi sm an ag em en t of th e property of widows who ha d dedi cate d the mse lv es to th e service of th e te mp le . 7

J. D. M. Derrett sees it as a practice of lawyers who were entrusted with theoversight of prop erti es. Though a lawyer was entit led to re mu ne ra ti on forhis service, some paid themselves their expenses "at a lavish rate" from theestates in their care. 8

Joachim Jeremas disagrees with this explanation and suggests his own:The practi ce of devour ing of hou ses "is mu ch mo re likely to refer to th e scribes'habit of sponging on the hospitality of people of limited means." 9 WilliamLane also adopts this view. 10 But though we do not have access to the details

of the practice in th e Ma rc an te xt (or it s par all el in Luke) , it seem s t h a t th esense of the passage is that the devouring of widows' houses is a seriousbreach of tr us t an d a terr ible cr ime mu ch worse th an me rely "sponging onhospitality."

This is sup por ted by th e force of th e Greek word tr an sl at ed "devour"(), which suggests an action of "consuming completely," not simply sponging. This is true of its literal use in the NT (the birds eating the seedin Luke 8:5) as well a s of it s figurative us e (cf. the descript ion of the prodigal's use of his father's estate in Luke 15:30, which in t u r n leaves him des

t i tute; also, this word describes the effect of fire in Rev 11:5; 20:9). Thereader should expect t h a t whoever or whatever is the object of the devouring, it will be complete ly con sum ed as a re su lt . In financial ma t t e rs , a de voured victim would be left penniless.

Further, within this context it is the single sin of the scribes (apart fromtheir preoccupation with th e app ear anc es of piety) for whi ch Je su s condem nsthem (Mark 12:40c). Of course this sin is aggravated by the i r office as theofficial teachers of Israel's religion. Yet it is also the only sin t h a t has a direct impact on th e economic welfare of the people. In this sense it resemblesthe notorious Corban tradition, for which Je sus vilifies th e Ph ar is ee s in th estrongest terms (7:6-13). The effect of Corban was disobed ience to the To-rah, which in t u r n could res ult in d est it uti on for t he pa re nt s of anyone who

would honor i t . 1 1 The problem wit h both th e scribes and the Ph ar is ee s is notsimply the i r religious hypocrisy (though t h a t was itself evil). They com-pounded the i r sin of hypocrisy by actually overturning the Law of Moses,thus robbing those in society who were the most needy and vulnerable.

So by reading Mark 12:38-40 the reader is well prepared for the en

trance of the impoverished widow carrying her meager offering. Because she


4/11


follows so closely upon Jesus' denunciation of the scribes' practice of devouring the houses of widows, we are to assume that she represents the resultsof itthe wreckage left behind by the greediness of the scribes. 1 2 Mark, a

we shall see , takes grea t care to emphasize the depth of th is poor woman'spoverty.

This brings us to the account of the widow's offering, a pr on ou nc em entstory. 1 3 At the outset we may note that there are no text-critical problemsof major importance. 1 4 Mark opens the pericope in a deliberate way, 1 5 crating a vivid scene of temp le acti vity . 1 6

Mark's concern is to create a sense of contrast, within the pericope itseas well as between the widow and those who exploit widows (12:40). Withithe pericope the contrast between the many rich people and the one poor

widow is most easily seen in the s t ruc ture of two sentences in the passageitself:

Verses 41c and 42a joined by ("but")

adjective subject verb direct object 41c Man y rich people were pu tt in g in large am ou nt s42a a 1 7 poor widow pu t in two sma ll co in s

1 2 R A Cole picks up on thi s idea whe n he writ es "He re by contr ast is one of th e very groupmade a prey by the scribes, a widow" {Mark An Introduction and Commentary [Grand RapidEerdmans , 1982] 196) Swe te also specu lat es th a t "sh e ma y once ha ve bee n one of [th e ric h

widow s] , and reduced to dest i tu t ion by Pharisaic rapaci ty" {The Gospel According to Mark [Lodon Macmi llan , 1909] 293) Even if she were not an actua l, lite ral victim, she is rep res ent ati ve of

vict im s of sc ri bal exploita ti on by v ir tue of he r severe po ver ty as well as of Mark's placement of thisaccount in this context

1 3 Cf C Cranfield, The Gospel According to Mark (Cambridge Cambridge University,1963) 385

1 4 The open ing verse of th e pericope (v 41) ha s several va ri an t readin gs, bu t th e differences aremostly minor

1 5

This deliberate style is in contrast to Luke's account of the widow's offering, which he also includes betwee n the denun cia tion of th e scribes a nd th e Olivet discourse (following Ma rk) The re isno crisp brea k betwee n the pericopes wit hm Luk e 20 45 -2 1 5 ff The action kee ps on moving w ithou t stopp ing for a br ea th Mar k, however, recor ds Je su s as sitti ng down to wa tch the bus y activity surr ound ing the treas ury , as if he were intention ally looking for something in part icul ar This deliberate style will show up again in Ma rk 12 43 The re Ma rk records Je su s calling th e disciples tohimself before he ins tru cts th em Luk e simply records Je su s speak ing out Only by looking back at Luke 20 45 do we find that his audience is the disciples, though the crowd may have been listen ing (Mark' s accoun t is for the ears of th e disciples only) Finally , Ma rk is somew hat mor e descriptive and is concerned to emphasize the (relative) cost of the widow's gift (cf especially Mark with the epexegetical in 12 44 with Luke's abbreviated

v in 21 4)1 6 The vividnes s of Mar k's descript ion is bro ugh t out in th e lan gua ge This conclusion is b ased

di i i i f hi i d i


5/11


Verses 44a and 44b joined by ("but")

subject + genitive of source possessive pronoun aorist verb44a They all out of the riches to them 1 9 put in

44b she out of the poverty of her put inJesus is observing how the wealthy are making their contributions to

the treasury, 20 when suddenly one lone and impoverished 21 widow entersthe scene. She also makes her contribution, but by any normal standard itis an insignificant amount. In Je sus' eyes, however, it is an offering beyondordinary measure. Solemnly he calls his disciples to himself in order to instruct them.

Jesus' words are filled with irony. The widow's offering is actually greater than all the offerings made by the rich. He then explains that the value of the offering is best measured against the financial worth of the offerer (wemight say, somewhat crudely perhaps, that the quality of an offering is bestmeasured as a percentage of total assets). Considered in this way, the poor

widow's offering was far superior to the others, for it was all that she owned. 22

At th is point (and we can only speculate), the disciples may have recalled Jesus' teaching on cross-bearing (8:34-38) and self-denying service toothers (10:42-45; note, too, that each of these teachings begins with Jesuscalling either the multitude and his disciples [8:34] or the ten indignant dis

ciples [10:42] to himself first). The poor widow has embodied that teachingin her own sacrificial giving. How different she is from the wealthy, whogive only from their surplus (after their own needs are satisfied) and thusnever feel the joyful pinch of self-denial in the cause of love (note 12:28-34)!

As noted above, there is a second contrast: that between the humble, sincere and (until Jesus) anonymous devotion of the widow and the arrogant,superficial and ostentatious displays of devotion on the part of the scribes(12:38-40). It is a matter of genuine faith, which the widow expresses by the generosity of her offering (she trus ts that the God of Israel will meet her needs), versus unbelief, which the scribes express by exploiting their officefor their own financial gain. Hers was a faith working through love, theirs was a hollow religion. The forms were present, but their religion had beenemptied of its spiritual content.

19 Here is a dative of possession.2 0 It is uncertain how to best translate . In Mark 12:41-44 the context seems to call

for the translation "collection box" (so BAGD), not "treasury" (but see Marshall, Luke 751). If so,

it was probably one of the thirteen chests in the temple set up for the collection of the shekel tax.Six of the chests were marked (in Aramaic) "for freewill offerings" (cf. eqal. 6:5). Presumably oneof the six received the widow's offering


6/11


To many readers this second contrast may provide all the explanation thatis needed as to why Mark included this account in his gospel. It is not simplya teaching on self-denying service (though it is that). It also serves to settr ue faith (t he widow's) over an d agai ns t the unbel ief of th e relig ious le ader sJesus had just condemned. On this view no clear, thematic transition fromthe widow's offering to the Olivet discourse is necessary. The latter is simplynew material .

A more careful look at the flow of thought from 12:38 through 13:5, however, rev eal s a del ibe rat e st ru ct ur e in whic h th e account of th e widow's offering fits properly and logically. The 12:41-44 pericope not only looks back toth e denu ncia tio n of th e scribes bu t also ant ici pat es the prophetic discourseon the destruction of the temple. On this understanding, the widow herself

stands as a symbol. Her impoverished condition alone is a scandal in Israelin th e light of Tora h. But the cir cums tanc es of he r poverty mak e the scand alfar more grievous, for it has come at the hands of those who are teachers inIsra el: th e gua rd ia ns of Tor ah an d the tr ue religion of Yahweh. Thereforethe only thi ng left, given Is rael 's flagrant apos ta sy (which, as not ed above,is alluded to th rou gho ut Ma rk' s gospel), is ju dgm en t. On this view Ma rk ha sincluded the account of the poor widow as an important piece of evidence tomake God's case against Israel complete. 2 3

Broadly, then, the structure (with thematic connectors) looks like this:

A. De st it ut e widows (devouring widows ' house s, 12:40)B. Des tit ute widow in tem ple (de sti tut e widow's offering, 1 2:4 1-4 4)C. Temp le (prophecy of tem ple 's des truct ion , cha p. 13)

Yet the key to understanding the significance of the placement of 12:4144 is the OT background. That is why it is proper to view the widow as animportant redemptive-historical symbol. Her entrance into the court of thewomen with her offering (described so carefully by Mark) is also the entrance

of a figure who carries with her some meaningful imagery right out of theHebrew Scriptures. 2 4 Her presence carries an emotional punch, which is intended to call to the reader's mind just who and what a widow was in Israelamong the people of God.

In the OT, widows, along with the fatherless and aliens, were the mostvulnerable and dependent class of people in the land. 2 5 As such, widows wereentitled to unique protection under the Law of Moses. In Exod 22:22-24 anIsraelite was forbidden to afflict a widow. If a widow was afflicted it was her

23 "If the leaders of the Jewish religion treated such pious people in a way criticised by Jesusin (Luke) 20 47 it follows that the system was ripe for judgment It is no accident that the prophecy


7/11


privilege to appeal directly to Yahweh for justice. If she did so, her oppressorwas liable to the death penalty, executed by Yahweh ("I will kill you with thesword"), which would result (ironically) in widowhood for the wife of theofffender. Israel is reminded that the Sovereign and Almighty God, who doesnot show partiality or accept a bribe, will certainly execute justice for thewidow (Deut 10:18).

An Israelite widow was particularly vulnerable and dependent becauseof her inability to provide for herself. In agrarian Israel it was necessary toown and work the land for one's sustenance. A woman without a husband orsons (particularly if she were advanced in age) would be unable to supportherself (e.g. Naomi in the book of Ruth). To remedy this, the Law of Mosesincluded all sorts of safeguardssoc ial net sdesign ed to ensu re th a t a widow

would not become destitute and starve. For example, there was the provisionof the trienn ial ti the . Inste ad of th e tith e being brou ght to th e san ctu ary , inthe third year it was brought to and deposited in the local town so that thewidows who lived there might "come and eat and be satisfied" (Deut 14:29).

It is important to note that obedience to this command would not deprivethe Israelites of adequate food supplies for their own families. On the contrary, faithful obedience to Yahweh's command would guarantee blessing toIsrael. Generosity in the tithe would result in God blessing his people in allthe works of their hands (14:29).

In spite of their hardships, widows were as much a part of the community of God's people as anyone else (cf. the language describing the celebration at the Feasts of Weeks and Tabernacles in 16:11, 14). Instead of beingoverlooked they were to receive special and unique compensation. So at harvest time a landowner was not to return to his field for a forgotten sheaf,nor was he to go over his olive tree a second time once it had been beaten,nor was a vin eya rd to be picked twice. In each case wh at ev er re ma in ed afterthe first act of harvesting was to be left for the widow (24:19-21; cf. also thegleaning law in Lev 19:9-10; 23:22, as well as Ruth 2, where gleaning iscarried out). 26

In a sense Israel was to look in two different directions to find incentiveto obey the se laws concernin g the care of widows. By looking back ward theywere to remember their own bitterness as slaves under the cruelty of Egyptand recall God's wonderful and gracious redemption (Deut 24:18, 22). Likewise they were to be gracious and compassionate in their dealings with theneedy and vulnerable in their midst. By looking forward they were to seethe promise of God's blessing. Obedience to the law would bring ample pro

vision from God to meet all their needs ("that the Lord your God may blessyou in all the works of your hands").


8/11


9/11


garded by its appointed gu ar di an s th en only jud gme nt re main s. The nation is apostate. 2 7

The presence of this widow is reminiscent of the widow of Zarephath(1 Kgs 17:7-24; cf. Luke 4:25-26). Both widows are living in poverty, eachin a time of national apostasy for the people of God (though of course the widow of Zarepha th is a Gentile who resides outside of the borders of Israel). Both widows are characterized by their faith. The widow of Zarephath, in obedience to the prophet, gives up all that she has to live on inorder to me et th e nee ds of Yahweh's se rv an t Elijah, believin g t h a t Isr ael 'sGod will in t u r n me et he r ne eds accordin g to his pro mise (1 Kgs 17:12- 16).The widow in the temple also gives up all that she has to live on, believingt ha t Yahweh will care for he r accord ing to his word (Exod 22: 22- 24; Ps s68:5; 146:9). In th is way t h e widow bypass es h u m a n ju dge s an d ma ke s h er appeal directly to God. Finally, each of these widows serves as a rebuke tothe apos tate nat ion : th e widow of Za re ph at h becau se Yahweh overlooks th e widows of Is rae l an d cares for her, even tho ug h she is a Gen til e; t he widowin the temple because her destitute condition proves Israel to be a covenant-

breaker. As a result , judgment is coming swiftly. The reader is brought from the

impoverished widow to th e desc ripti on of th e ju dg me nt of t he temp le inMark 13. Th is widow (symbolically) is one of th e la st exh ibi ts of ev idenc e

in God's court to seal his case against the nation of Israel. The Lord of thetemple had suddenly come to the temple, but he came bringing judgment(Mai 3:1-3; cf. Mark 11:11). Among those who would fall before his righteous anger are those "who oppress the widows" (Mai 3:5). It is no coincidence, th en, t h at Ma rk 13:1 records Je su s le aving th e tem ple . He ha s foundit to be thoroughly corrupted and apostate. It will be left desolate.

Therefore Ma rk 12:4 1- 44 shoul d be und ers too d as th e convergence of two themes. First, the theme of true piety (i.e. confident trust in God) characterizes the remnant in Israel. We are to observe the faith of the widow,

who in he r devotion to God makes he r offering out of her poverty and yet

2 7 Corban was also evidence of th is ap ost asy Wrig ht (cf 11 supra) correctly links the twocontexts But his conclusion rega rdi ng th e pericope of 12 41 -4 4 is oif th e m ar k His view is thaJesus is not calling his disciples to learn from the widow's example Jes us is simply lame nting thereligious condition of th e na ti on (12 40), which is il lus tr at ed by th e pa the ti c condition of th e widowherself Wright t hin ks we should reg ard "Je sus ' at ti tu de to th e widow's gift as a downright disapproval, and not as a n appr oba tio n The stu dy does not provide a pious co nt ra st to th e conduct of the scribes in th e preceding section , ra th er it provides a furt her illu str ati on of the ills of offcial devotion" ("Widow's Mit e" 262) Wrig ht does full jus tic e to re ad in g th e passage in its contex(even hinting at its relationship to the Olivet discourse), but he misses the point of the contrast


10/11


puts "more into the treasury than all the others" (12:43). The quality of herfaith stands in sharp contrast to the false piety of the hypocrites, who aremore concerned with appearances than godliness. From her example believers are encouraged to live a life of similar faith, meeting the needs of otherswhile trusting that their heavenly Father, "who sees what is done in secret,"will meet their own needs. Further, they should shun any temptation to pursue their religion in a way that sets a premium on the approval of men ratherthan the approval of God (cf. John 5:41-44).

Second, the widow is a symbol: She represents one of the last nails in thecoffin of national Israel. The chronic disregard of God's Law and the shamreligion of th e nation 's leader s were sum med u p in her. Mar k has stra tegically included this account to link the denunciation of the scribes' wicked

activities with the prophecy of the destruction of the temple. As the Chronicler ha d wr it ten, "the wr at h of Yahweh was aroused agai ns t hi s people an dthere was no remedy" (2 Chr 36:16). Once again, there was no other remedyfor Israel's apostasy except divine judgment.


11/11

^ s

Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual useaccording to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and asotherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without thecopyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be aviolation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permissionfrom the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journaltypically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specificwork for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or coveredby your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding thecopyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previouslypublished religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAScollection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the AmericanTheological Library Association.

A Closer Look at the Widows Offering

Documents

Transcript of A Closer Look at the Widows Offering