Kindness for the controller

𝙅𝙤𝙝𝙣 11:21 𝙈𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙝𝙖 𝙨𝙖𝙞𝙙 𝙩𝙤 𝙅𝙚𝙨𝙪𝙨, “𝙇𝙤𝙧𝙙, 𝙞𝙛 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙝𝙖𝙙 𝙗𝙚𝙚𝙣 𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚, 𝙢𝙮 𝙗𝙧𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙙𝙞𝙚𝙙.”

The would/could/should haves – part of our entitled commentary to God about our take on life after events happen. While it’s perfectly understandable and good to review things that went wrong in order to prevent them from going (as) wrong next time, it’s presumption to read God the riot act. We simply don’t have the equipment or certainly the authority to instruct the Lord of our lives as to how things SHOULD have gone.

For Martha, this was completely in character. Though she followed this statement with “But even now I know that whatever you ask from God, God will give you.” (v 22), that was a self-perceived consolation to the sovereign will of Martha. This was the person who bossed her family around – taking umbrage that her sister Mary would not help her do her frantic, frenetic (and never ending) preparation, cleaning and (re)ordering of things for the guests. No, said Jesus, you can be like that, but Mary will certainly be allowed to sit and listen regardless.

It’s miraculous Jesus did up upbraid Martha – cut her down to size and knock her off her high horse. But he did not. As always, Jesus knew what was in a person, and Martha was hurting inside. We have no history regarding her past, but the need for control and intolerance of things not going according to plan is well understood even in our own lives. Martha had just lost her brother. Among the spectrum of things going wrong, that would be a biggie. Her pain in watching a loved one get sick and die is a well-known human experience. One of the earliest expressions of grief is anger – which blames. There’s little question that Martha had seen loss, along with personal criticism and shame. She felt things deeply.

It would seem a suitable emotional reaction to put Martha in her place, to let her know how selfish her manipulative control really was. But Jesus didn’t do that and it’s remarkable. Instead, Jesus grieved with her and then showed real sovereignty – that of Almighty God – and raised her brother Lazarus from the dead. That’s how God moves in the lives of the bossy, controlling, bullying people – shows them goodness in the dearest way.

It is so easy to sting back the people who dig and weasel and push and scratch their way into ordering your life according to THEIR program. Jesus shows what they need. Hardly acquiescence to their insistent wranglings but kindness in spite of them and in response to them. As usual, Jesus turns the world upside down and heals it. He’s glorious.

The vast treasure of the little flock

𝗟𝘂𝗸𝗲 𝟭𝟮:𝟯𝟮‭-‬𝟯𝟰 “𝗙𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗻𝗼𝘁, 𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗳𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸, 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗙𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿’𝘀 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝗽𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗱𝗼𝗺. 𝗦𝗲𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱𝘆. 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗱𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿𝘀𝗲𝗹𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆𝗯𝗮𝗴𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘄 𝗼𝗹𝗱, 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗱𝗼𝗲𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗹, 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝗲𝗳 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗼 𝗺𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝗱𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗼𝘆𝘀. 𝗙𝗼𝗿 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗶𝘀, 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗵𝗲𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗼.

After pointing out God’s glory in all creation – in birds, flowers and grass and saying how trite they were – even in their existence – to human beings, Jesus gave the “therefore” passage above. It’s both supremely endearing and challenging, even convicting.

The “little flock” is nonetheless the object of God’s pleasure and recipient of the very Kingdom of God. This flies in the face of any “big flock” mentality. Small is good in this passage, and of course Jesus was speaking to the small band of original believers. As the church grew, “little flock” would no longer describe it, except in comparison with the overall population.

A strong part of Jesus’ description of the creation was God’s care for it. It was and is God who waters the earth, sends sunlight to plants and provides food for all the animal kingdom. This is an indication of his care for people, whom God cares about more. There is hierarchy in the creation, and humankind is its apex.

The instruction to sell possessions and give to the needy implies that one has possessions and one is not needy. Far from any human socialistic system, this is generosity after God’s own heart.

And once exercised, there is a new treasure obtained. This is a restatement of the proverb:

𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗯𝘀 𝟭𝟵:𝟭𝟳 𝗛𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝗼𝗿 𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗢𝗥𝗗, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝗵𝗶𝗺 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗱𝗼𝗻𝗲.

… which is an almost scandalous truth concerning the heavenly economy. God becomes the debtor to human kindness and generosity. A reward is kept in eternity for the generous.

The final statement – “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also” – shows that giving one’s possessions takes them off the throne of one’s life. You cannot worship something you give away and even renounce. Once done, the heart of a person – his/her intents and purposes – are directed and reside in heaven.

So, who is needy around me? Hands would go up if the question is asked. But clearly, there is godly counsel to be gained in this. Do I give grudgingly of any resource – finances, time, energy, etc. ? If so, that needs cleansing and correcting. I have freely received; get over yourself O my heart.

Do I demand notice and reward for my acts of kindness in this life? If so, Jesus says I have received my reward in full. That is NOT the treasure described in this passage. Give and I will prime the pump of blessing in my own life; that is very true. Let me be God’s conduit – his pipe – of blessing. Let it flow.

Undesirable heroes

𝗟𝘂𝗸𝗲 𝟭𝟬:𝟯𝟯‭-‬𝟯𝟰 𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝗮 𝗦𝗮𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗻, 𝗮𝘀 𝗵𝗲 𝗷𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘆𝗲𝗱, 𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝘄 𝗵𝗶𝗺, 𝗵𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗛𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝗺 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝘂𝗽 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝘀, 𝗽𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗶𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗲. 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝘁 𝗵𝗶𝗺 𝗼𝗻 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗺𝗮𝗹 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝗵𝗶𝗺 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗸 𝗰𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗵𝗶𝗺.

In his story to demonstrate what a “neighbor” is, Jesus made a hated Samaritan the hero of the story. The ethnicity and place of origin of this character was no mistake – Jesus was confronting national pride and exclusion. That tendency in Jesus’ teaching and actions is nothing short of an agenda. It stands as an unexpected point of focus for a Messiah who people expected to establish the nation of Israel as supreme over all others.

It confronted pride head on. That a Samaritan could be the only righteous person in the story while the religious leaders (priest and Levite) simply could not be bothered was a deep and cutting criticism of the current state of Jewish religiosity. Jesus never opposed the Law of Moses nor its faithful observance. But he pointedly opposed the corruption that came to dominate that faith during his days on earth.

Though the story was particular towards neighborliness, first century Judaism was hardly the only faith community practicing tribal and racial self-declaration of righteousness with literally nothing to show for its claims. To this day religion self-aggrandizes and puffs up its authorities and managers of ritual and law. And to this day it is anywhere from derogatory exclusivity to murderously hateful towards those outside its organization. Yet, says Jesus, it is outside corporate religion where true neighbors are found in heart and practice. And loving one’s neighbor is loving God, says the Law which the religious rulers claimed to uphold.

Am I like this Samaritan? Can I be bothered to help the bleeding, naked, dying victim? Do I even see that person? Certainly, the lesson goes far beyond a physical victim of violent crime. Indeed, it is the inner wounds that may need binding up and dressing. Indeed, there is a convalescence of soul that I can be a part of.

And do I allow my “least desirable” neighbors to be heroes in my stories and life? Permitting them to be good neighbors makes me a good neighbor. Telling the stories of their righteousness and heroism lifts them up in my consideration and that of others.

Cry of the beggar

Mark 10:48-49 And many rebuked him, telling him to be silent. But he cried out all the more, “Son of David, have mercy on me!” And Jesus stopped and said, “Call him.” And they called the blind man, saying to him, “Take heart. Get up; he is calling you.”

Bartimaeus was a blind beggar.  His trade was dictated by his physical state; there was no program to help the poor and afflicted in Roman-occupied first century Israel.  As part of the beggar-underclass of people, he was very used to raising his voice for alms and any mercy that he could get to come his way.

There’s also little doubt that Bart knew about Jesus – one who didn’t just give alms but who healed blindness itself.  If that could happen, his entire life would change radically.  He could be a productive person.  It’s hard to consider all the possibilities and plans he had imagined for his entire life that could transpire if he could only see.

But when he raised his voice, calling on the “Son of David” – a well-known name for Messiah, that those around him thought he was only begging as usual.  They told him to be silent, thinking perhaps that common beggars had no business involving Jesus.  Begging was not his intent, though, and their chiding and squelching his voice had the net effect of keeping him blind and poor.  Their pushing him out of the way was oppressive and cruel.

Jesus stopped and would ask him what he wanted.  Bart could’ve asked for great riches, to have his calluses healed or anything else.  He asked to see.  And see he did.

Do I

1. Assert myself when I have a real need only Jesus can meet?  Bartimaeus gave voice to the yearning of his heart and would not be silenced.  Do I do that, or slink back into a beggarly life of want?  Can the voices of others, perhaps bothered by my very presence, shout me down and scoff me underfoot?  Hear the (perhaps annoying) cry of the poor man, O my soul!  Do not be silenced!
2. Find my myself among the annoyed, insisting the loud beggar cease his/her rantings?  For sure there is dysfunctional entitlement.  But there is also a need to be heard and listened to.  Do I listen?  Do I pause to hear the stories of the poor one?  Or do I instead call his/her voice a distracting bother, with no substance behind the noise that fills my ears?  O my soul, learn to listen, for the stories you’ll hear will inform all mercy and wisdom.

So be it.

The hearts of sheep and goats

Matthew 25:40 And the King will answer them, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.’

…

45 Then he will answer them, saying, ‘Truly, I say to you, as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to me.’

Among the parables, there is none as less-veiled as this one, where the King judges the sheep and the goats.  The sheep are to be saved eternally, the goats, condemned.  And the measure of judgment is their former treatment of “the least of these”.  As Keith Green pointed out, the distinction is what these people did or didn’t do.  A casual reading would therefore conclude that people are saved by helping the downtrodden alone.  So, a life of charity, performed with whatever motive, produces eternal salvation.

That take on the parable is proven false by the words of the sheep and goats themselves – they had NO IDEA what they had done to warrant this judgment.  So, they did not do what they did with any eternal aim. 

Jesus is citing the fruit of salvation.  His followers will care for the “least of these” by the prompting of the Holy Spirit in their lives.  There is no accounting of the work; it simply flows.  Even when there is not ostensible effort extended (for whatever reason), there is prayer and compassion in the hearts of his people. 

It is a sobering call to compassion.  If I claim to follow Jesus – and I do – do I have instances of helping those who cannot help themselves and can never pay me back?  Do I pay love forward?  I certainly intend to, and taking inventory, I certainly have.

Should I cease to care and therefore to act, for reason of pain or injustice or personal priorities or simple negligence, I start venturing into goat territory.    Love grows cold if not renewed in Christ; it is a chief strategy of the enemy of my soul to advance that. 

The parable acts as a good thermometer, then, a vital test – not of actions but of the heart. 

Matthew 5:16 In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.

… that is, those who were not formerly praising God now are, because of the heart-driven actions of his sheep.

The Banquet of the Secondary invitees

𝗠𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘄 𝟮𝟮:𝟴‭-‬𝟭𝟬 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗮𝗶𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀, ‘𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗱𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆, 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗵𝘆. 𝗚𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝗶𝗻 𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗱𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗳𝗲𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗮𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗱.’ 𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗱𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗮𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝘄𝗵𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱, 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝗯𝗮𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱. 𝗦𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘄𝗲𝗱𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝗳𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗴𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀.

In the story Jesus told, there was a wedding feast given by the king of the land. He announced the opulent food and ambience of the event as he invited people to come. But they refused, even mistreating and murdering those the king sent to invite them. The king was furious and concluded that his original intended guests were not worthy of the invitation and that he would invite ANYONE who would come. Guests of all types were gathered and the hall was filled.

The story was directed squarely at the religious rulers present at its telling. They were certainly invited to the feast of the Most High God, and knew all about the joy of fellowship and the delights offered in eternity. Yet the person of Jesus was odious to them; they would not receive instruction or even advice from him. Their highbrow positions were more important than hearing the very Word of God they purportedly held to.

For them, Jesus was a servant inviting them to the wedding feast. They would refuse the invitation and kill that servant in their obstinate pride. Meanwhile the common people, whom they lorded themselves over, would accept the invitation and inherit eternal life and a place at the feast. Jesus was saying that the Kingdom of God turns humankind’s caste systems on their head. Society’s oppressive hierarchies are in opposition to God.

If I am angered or insulted by God’s invitation extended to people deemed unworthy, dirty, sinful or “beneath” me in any way, I place myself among the gnashers of teeth, excluded from the banquet. The story does go on to speak of one removed from the banquet because he was not in wedding attire, but my action is to “Go therefore to the main roads and invite to the wedding feast as many as you find”, for that is the heart of the Lord. And may I learn to love and serve all so gathered.

Generosity and Labor

Matthew 20:15 Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?’

The master of the field had decided to give equal wages to all his workers no matter how long they had worked.  The ones who had been at it the longest were upset by this, since they only earned the same as those who had worked a few hours.  It was a labor dispute.

Then the master replied with the questions above.  There are 2 aspects to his words:

1. The protesting workers had been paid what they had agreed, but considered that they had control of what all others were paid.  They wanted equal pay for equal work but the master decided differently.  At the heart of that is an assumption that they thought the money was theirs to distribute, not his.
2. The master’s intent was generosity.  In a day and in a place where people lived hand to mouth, a day’s wages would ensure a family ate that night only.  He wanted no one to starve.  Nobody in the story was lazy, they were just unemployed, even into the late afternoon.

For 1., state-level socialism does in fact remove ownership of fields and the wherewithal to pay workers from society.  The state is the master and its wages and conditions are engineered and metered.  The workers get their way – equal pay for equal work.  Except that corruption invariably creeps in and work ethic degrades because there is no reason to work well or even care about one’s toil.  There is no advancement and there is no reward for extra diligence.

Ownership of resources allows for incentivizing good attitude and extra work.  If a “master” grows in wealth, his/her resources can be re-invested in people and entities that will continue to grow.  Greed notwithstanding, the organic seeding of resources has the often-realized potential of causing people and corporate entities to thrive.  Individuals can accumulate wealth as well, becoming “masters” in their own right; it’s part of the system. 

As a follower of Jesus, I believe all I have belongs to God.  Not a few times have people accused and insinuated that I need to give here or there – to them or others in need.  Yet what I have is mine to steward, to pray for wisdom about how and where to give and invest.  I am allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me.

For 2., the scourge of the wealthy – their greed – is vividly exposed.  If I want to protect freedom of resource distribution and the growth of my estate and the community and nation, I MUST practice generosity.  Greed is why socialism arose and why it keeps its place as an alternative to free enterprise.  And greed is not only the practice of the well-to-do (though being greedy with a lot has larger impact).  Ten thousand mini-misers have the same effect as one wealthy one.  The workers in the story were not generous to be sure; they wanted what was coming to them and a strict limit to what the late arrivals were paid.  They did indeed begrudge the generosity of the master.

God is infinitely generous.  His reward is not “fair” as humans would compute it, but abounding in grace as an expression of unconditional love.  If I receive the free gift of salvation – and I do – I cannot with integrity begrudge the generosity of my God towards those who don’t deserve it in my eyes.  Let me learn this deeply.