43 - Mark 12:43

’Verily I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast more in than all they which have cast into the treasury.’ -Mark 12:43. The reason for taking this view is added: "For all they did cast in of their abundance; but she of her want did cast in all that she had, even all her living." From Luke’s report we learn that the sum she cast in was two mites (less than a penny), and that she cast it in "unto the offerings of God." As an expression of piety, of love to God, her offering outweighed all the gifts which rich men had been casting into the treasury, there in the presence of Jesus.

There seems to be a connection between these words of Christ and the remark made shortly after by the disciples: "Master, see what manner of stones and buildings!" They spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts. Something like this was perhaps in their mind: ’Without the offerings of the rich how could the cost of all this magnificence be met? Year after year, from the days of Herod the Great, enormous sums have been lavished upon the embellishment of the temple; the humble offerings of the poor are of course not to be despised; they are acceptable to God inasmuch as they testify to the sincerity of their piety, their spirit of self-sacrifice; but unless the rich had given largely to the treasury of the Lord, how could this goodly and imposing pile have ever been reared? It will not do, will it, to discourage the rich?’ Our Lord says in reply that the sight of this splendid edifice suggests very different reflections to him from those that commonly present themselves to the minds of spectators. The Jews gazed upon it with unbounded admiration. For forty and six years no pains, no treasure had been spared to make it one of the architectural wonders of the world, to cause it to correspond in magnificence with the grandeur and sublimity of the worship to which it was consecrated. It stood there as a monument of the nation’s piety, a sublime expression on the one part of their devotion to the one living and true God, and on the other of his choice of them to be his own peculiar people. They willingly overlooked the fact that Herod the Great, who had taken such a conspicuous part in making it what it was, was an Idumean by birth, and was a monster of cruelty and impiety. How suggestive is the fact that one who had taken such an extraordinary interest in the renovation and embellishment of this temple was the very person who sought to destroy the infant Jesus, slaughtering in his blind endeavour the innocent babes of Bethlehem! Jesus of Nazareth had little admiration to spare for the artistic beauty or grandeur of the temple. It spoke to him far more of the vanity and self-love and hypocrisy of man than of his piety. It seemed to the Jews a pile to last for ever. As a matter of fact they carried on the work of amplifying and embellishing it till thirty-seven years after the death of Christ, till close up to the time when the armies of Titus encompassed Jerusalem. Christ looked at the goodly stones and offerings, the columns and spires, and thought of the judgment of God now of a long time lingering not, and soon to fall upon the pile, and bring it into undistinguishable ruin. No, his complacency is not in the wealth here lavished, but in the two mites given by the widow. We cannot doubt that Jesus would have looked with much more satisfaction upon the humblest and meanest of edifices built entirely with the money of those who had in pure love to God denied themselves to give, than upon this goodly temple. It was to a great extent suggestive to him of the hypocrisy and selfishness and oppression so terribly denounced by him in the speech recorded in Matthew 23:1-39. The Jews gloried in this temple, not so much because God had covenanted to be found there, as because they viewed it as an expression of their piety, their munificence, their skill, their vast ideas, their power. It glorified them. They passed by Jesus as he stood there in the courts uttering the words of everlasting life, to march grandly up to the treasury and make these pompous offerings. The temple was a powerful rival to Jesus. They heard with indignation, and treasured up in resentment, his words, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it again; in this place is one greater than the temple; no man cometh unto the Father save by me." Is there not in this a hint for the ritualists of our day? Is not their error that of the Jews, with simply such differences as are imposed by the fact that the New Testament is acknowledged? Is there not here a hint for the devotees of art? They wish to give us beautiful and costly churches. Why? To honour God? Well, we can only honour God by deferring to his view of matters. His view is that the temple which best expresses the piety of his people, the power of truth over their hearts, is most pleasing to him. Take from your building-fund all that was not given from a simple desire for the glory of God, and the residue will ordinarily be very small; but the building reared with that residue is the one in which God will take most pleasure, where he will most delight to meet his people. The two mites were her all, and she gave them. But how would she get food on the morrow? Surely she must have some secret store, some mysterious cruse of oil, some rich and generous friend? Yes, that is the secret. She loves God, and gives cheerfully for his service what she has, because he loves her, and has always blessed her, and she is sure he will never leave her nor forsake her. Without faith it is impossible to please God. She believes in God’s loving care, confides in it for the future; is grateful for the past; deems it a privilege to give her mite. Is not this the faith that says, Give us this day our daily bread, and the gratitude that receives it from God’s loving hand?

How many flatter themselves that they have given largely to the cause of God who have never really had to stint themselves because of their giving? What was given was something outside of their pressing wants, outside perhaps of their comforts, away possibly in the outer circle of their luxuries, if not even beyond that. Christians are bought with a price; they and all that they have; all that is theirs is Christ’s, by the terms of discipleship. Do we abide by these terms? Do we cheerfully give all that Christ calls for, the moment he calls for it, even if it be the last two mites?