 |
|
Risk and Restoration
|
|
Pentecost 23B 2009 Last Sunday, Bill Renner and I were talking before worship about the story of Ruth. In that service, we read of the famine that drove Naomi, her husband Elimelech, and their two sons from Bethlehem to the reviled country of Moab–southeast of the Dead Sea in modern Jordan, where the sons eventually married, but had no children. The deaths of all three men; Ruth’s profound and poetic statement of loyalty, and Naomi and Ruth’s subsequent move to Bethlehem. Even with all of that, Bill recognized that the story was less than complete. I encourage you to read the entire four chapters for yourself. But just in case you don’t make time to read the four short chapters that comprise the entire book, our reading today dips into the second half of the story and covers the main events. Because of Ruth’s devotion to Naomi, Naomi’s distant relative, Boaz, is able to act as go’el, or redeemer of the family name for Naomi. Ultimately, Boaz and Ruth marry, and Ruth gives birth to the son that becomes grandfather to David, Israel’s beloved king. For those who do not know the term, a go’el is a male relative who ensures that family property remains held by family members. He–it was always a he–also prevents a relative from entering into slavery.[1,81]Women’s Bible Commentary] So imagine: here is a culture set up so that women are under the protection of a man: father, husband, son, brother. It’s the man’s responsibility to speak out on behalf of the woman’s rights. Without that protection, women are without rights, and can be dispossessed of everything.[2,49] And here is Naomi, without husband or sons or grandsons. A stranger in a strange land. A foreigner with no way of providing for herself. But the famine that drove Naomi and Elimelech to Moab has ended. There is bread again in the house of bread–in Bethlehem. And it is to Elimelech’s home town that Naomi returns with her daughter-in-law, Ruth. There in Bethlehem, redemption is fulfilled. Fast forward roughly 1100 years to the time of Jesus. The status of women in Jewish culture has not changed much. A widow still depends on the men in her life to speak out on her behalf, and without the support of that extended family, her options are pretty well reduced to prostitution or begging. Jesus is in the huge temple which dominates Jerusalem’s landscape. The temple itself is in the area known as the Temple Mount–an area big enough to fit two dozen football fields easily. There are porticoes, colonnades and courtyards, able to accommodate the tens of thousands of worshipers that swarm the area during Passover. And somewhere in the crowds are Jesus and his disciples. In the gospel of Mark, it is Jesus’ only visit to the temple, and he is watching the goings-on at the temple treasury. It’s the public place where worshipers give their offerings into a trumpet-shaped metal container that functions kind of like the Muscular Dystrophy funnels. You know the ones: they allow you to watch your coins on their journey to the bottom of the container. At the temple treasury, someone with a lot of coins makes more noise and calls more attention than someone with few coins.[2,55] Jesus watches rich people put in large sums; then a poor widow puts in two small coins worth about a penny, and he comments–on the giving of the rich and the giving of the widow. Contrary to what many of us have heard–especially around stewardship season–the thrust of our gospel reading is not focused on the widow’s generosity, but on those who get rich at the expense of the poor. So here is Jesus, watching people give at the temple, and he suggests that the widow’s poverty may be a direct result of those religious institutions who ‘devour’ a widow’s home so that even shelter is denied her. This practice was written into ancient religious law–hence the arrangement for a go’el/redeemer...but it is hardly confined to antiquity. We have witnessed exactly the same dynamic in sub-prime mortgages extended to those who were unable to sustain them. And the results are predictable. The at-risk homeowner loses her savings and her home, and those who packaged the deal are too big to fail. Jesus’ message is not “give till it hurts.” Jesus’ message recognizes the unsustainable sacrifice of the widow and condemns the institutional dynamics that compound her plight. This should be heard very clearly by those in our congregation who are on fixed incomes...by those who currently are unemployed, or without health insurance...by those who are single parents. You are not expected to give more.[2,54] This isn’t to say that this church doesn’t need more money to provide its current ministry. Or that we need more money to expand our ministry. We do. We seriously do. But the church is not in the business of creating financial hardships when there are others who can give more. The church is in the business of offering support to those who are at risk in our community. So let me end with two thoughts. The first is that for those who have little, give little. Your ministries of time and talent are also treasured.[2,54] Those who can give more–please, make that a priority. No church can sustain itself on leftovers. The second thought is to continue the work of relief and redemption. From the thousands of dollars given in $100 increments through Emergency Assistance, to the untold gallons of soup made and served at the Lord’s Table, these are the remnants of wheat and barley that sustain Ruth and Naomi before redemption, especially in this economic climate. But redemption is the long-term goal. Tutoring at Fox Chapel Elementary and community programming at Shaw move toward redemption for those at risk. So do policies that provide for the poor at home and abroad. Today we again have the opportunity to take part in the annual offering of letters sponsored by Bread for the World. The focus is on legislation updating our country’s foreign assistance priorities and structure. May the Ruths and Naomis in this land and any land know relief and redemption. *** [1] Women’s Bible Commentary, Carol A. Newsom (Author) and Sharon H. Ringe (Editor), Westminster John Knox Press, © 1992. |