It's a Wonderful Life

Rediscover the True Meaning of Christmas in the Classic TV Christmas Specials

(See Midnight Oil, below.)

Some of my pastor friends will accuse me of having crossed over to the dark side to join in the crass commercialization of Christmas, but I beg to differ. The idea for this sermon series, and the series itself as it has thus far been developed, was the brainchild of one of the pastors in my *covenant group. It has since been preached by all of us (or almost all) except me--and, purportedly, with good results. As the pastors in our group have taken it on in turn, the ideas and resources have accumulated (including some from pastors who have independently developed similar series, and now there are also some available from professional media resources like Midnight Oil Productions), demonstrating what fertile ground there is here. Another pastor friend of mine is always reminding me to meet my congregation on any given Sunday "right where they are." At this time of year, we are completely inundated with media messages about Christmas. Very soon, each and every TV special in the series will be shown, most more than once, on multiple TV broadcast and cable channels. A quick walk into the local department "super-" store (WalMart [TM], Target [TM], etc.) will reveal that these movies are the ones at the top of the shelves--they are the moving images and sounds that create the atmosphere, the context and background for our holiday preparations and family celebrations for the next month. They will be the source of late night jokes, casual references, and allusions in news stories.

Not that we'll be buying everything they are selling. We aren't and we won't. But if we needed some legitimation for preaching the gospel in this mode, we couldn't do better than appeal to Jesus himself. The stock characters and situations in many of Jesus' parables likely originated in the moral and ethical culture in which he was born and grew up. If there had been classic movies in Jesus' childhood, I'm sure he would have used them. When Jesus began to tell the story about the profligate (prodigal) son, for example, everyone around him probably nodded their appreciation, perhaps even predicting that the boy would wind up in a pig pen.



(Image source, http://d1shzm2uca9f83.cloudfront.net/large/remb_vz_varken.jpg)

They had heard this story before. The recognized the characters and the plot. Maybe they could even predict the young man's remorse, his repentance and his return home. But I doubt very much that they predicted the reception with which his father greeted him, or the upheaval in the older brother's expectations. (Luke 15:11-32)



(Image source, http://www.jneiman.com/images/058-prodigal-son.jpg)

Or, to cite another, when Jesus started out a story by telling his audience that "a man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho,"



(Image source, http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2121/2314500564_fc8ff751a6.jpg)

they may have been able to finish the first sentence without any help: "and fell into the hands of robbers, who stripped him, beat him, and went away, leaving him half dead." People traveling that road were always being mugged. But how many times had their version of the story ended with a Good Samaritan's good deed? (Luke 10:30-37)



(Image source, http://www.wwoaw.net/The%20Good%20Samaritan%20after%20van%20Gogh%20and%20Delacroix%201024%2080.JPG)

As we pursue the telling of the Advent Gospel of expectancy as it appears in the characters and situations of the TV Christmas Classics, we will be on the alert, identifying both where the movies have and, perhaps more importantly, where they haven't followed the twists and turns of the Christmas Story from which they often draw their inspiration.

There are too many such classic movies for any one 4- or 5-week sermon series. I have seen all of the following movies suggested and used more-or-less to good effect: Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, It's a Wonderful Life, Frosty the Snowman, How the Grinch Stole Christmas, Santa Claus is Comin' to Town, Jack Frost (a character in several of the animated classics), The Year without a Santa Claus, The Little Drummer Boy, and A Charlie Brown Christmas.

This year, we will be looking at 5 of the classics (4 Sundays of Advent + Christmas Eve).

November 29, It's a Wonderful Life

Zephaniah 3:14-20, Matthew 20:1-16

December 6, What Rudolph the Red Knows

Isaiah 9:2-7, John 1:1-18

December 13, Sympathy for the Grinch

Isaiah 53:1-5, Luke 1:67-79

December 20, Santa's Cause is Something Profound

Isaiah 60:1-7, Matthew 2:1-12

Christmas Eve, 7:00 pm

December 24, A Charlie Brown Christmas Eve

I'll blog a few ideas about the series each week, beginning now with the 1936 Frank Capra classic, It's a Wonderful Life (60th Anniversary Edition), starring James Stewart and Donna Reed.


Plot Summary, Wikipedia Summary.



What themes from the true meaning of Christmas appear in the movie?

• Humility and Self Sacrifice, for the sake of others. (Philippians 2:5-11)
  
  Saint Augustine of Hippo (354-430), in a famous Christmas Sermon (Sermon 187), rings the changes on this aspect of the Christmas story in his own inimitable way: "Maker of the sun, He is made under the sun. In the Father he remains, From his mother he goes forth. Creator of heaven and earth, He was born on earth under heaven. Unspeakably wise, He is wisely speechless. Filling the world, He lies in a manger. Ruler of the stars, He nurses at his mother's bosom. He is both great in the nature of God, and small in the form of a servant." (Translation source, "Reflections," Christianity Today, Vol. 41, no. 14, Dec. 8, 1997)
  
  
  
  
  No less a preaching light than C.H. Spurgeon could fill a whole sermon (and then some) with reflections on the fact that there was "No Room for Christ in the Inn." Many others have done the same, drawing on images old and new to illustrate the sort of humility that Christ took on.
  

  In the movie, George Bailey planned all his life to travel the world, to go to "Italy, Greece, the Parthenon, the Coliseum.” He plans when he returns from his world tour to attend college. Then, he’s going to “build things… airfields, skyscrapers a hundred stories high…bridges a mile long.”
  
  
  
  (Image source, http://nighthawknews.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/its_a_wonderful_life_02.jpg)
  
  One by one, George turns all these things down. Eventually he also turns down Mr. Potter’s outrageous offer of a lucrative $20,000/yr. salary – a salary that would more than have provided for his future wife and children.
  
  
  
  (The evil millionaire, Mr. Potter. Image source, http://avltheatre.com/ruben/potter.jpg)
  
  On the day of his wedding/honeymoon with bride Mary [!], on his way out of town [once again!], there’s a run on the bank. People are panicking like it's 1933, and they want their money.
  
  
  
  
  
  (Jimmy Stewart in "It's a Wonderful Life, image source: http://open.salon.com/blog/megan_stewart/2009/01/07/files/jamesstewart4601231343406.jpg)
  
  (Oh, wait, it probably is 1933 or thereabouts, because of the flashback from the final setting: Christmas Eve, 1946; George and Mary married in 1928.) The evil millionaire Mr. Potter sees this as his opportunity to take over the bank, and the town. Once again, George lets go of his rights and lays down his life so he can serve the townspeople – by using all but $2.00 of his honeymoon money to save the bank from collapse. In other words, George Bailey spends his entire life giving up his big dreams for the good of Bedford Falls.

  
  
• Why do bad things happen to good people?
  
  OR
  
• Does my life really make a difference? Does it matter at all that I lived? (Job 3:3)
  
  The title, or subtitle of this sermon might be, "Living a Life that Counts for All Eternity." The movie was, after all, loosely based on the short story "The Greatest Gift" by Philip Van Doren Stern. On Christmas Eve of 1946, George is broken and suicidal over the misplacing of an $8000 loan (lost by his Uncle Billy while bragging about brother Harry's accomplishments and recognition in the war) and the evil schemes of his nemesis, Mr. Potter. George crashes his car into a tree during a snowstorm and runs to a nearby bridge to commit suicide, feeling he is "worth more dead than alive" because of a $15,000 life insurance policy.
  
  
  
  
  
  (Image Source, http://esl-bits.net/scripts/WonderfulLife/images/wl_100208.jpg)
  
  George's guardian angel, Clarence, comes to earth to show George how his town, family, and friends would turn out if he had never been born. George has meant so much to so many people; should he really now just throw it all away? The angel, Clarence, shows George throughout how his town, his family, and his friends would have turned out if he had never been born. George meant so much to so many people; should he really just throw it all away?
  
  
  
• A Reversal of Fortune (Zephaniah 3:14-20, Matthew 20:1-16)
  
  After Clarence shows George what life would have been like for so many others if he had not been born (Bedford Falls = a slum, Pottersville; Mr. Gower in prison; Uncle Billy in an insane asylum; Harry dead), George prays to live again. Meanwhile the whole town has also been praying for George. His friends and family have collected a huge amount of money to rescue him. His brother Harry arrives just in time to propose a toast to his brother, "the richest man in town." Seeing how many lives he has touched, and the difference he has made, George Bailey truly does have "a wonderful life."
  
  
  
  (Image source, http://www.calendarlive.com/media/photo/2006-12/27020557.jpg)
  

The comparisons with the parable of the Laborers in the Vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16 are somewhat obvious. Jesus' parable is bracketed (19:30 and 20:16) with statements about reversals of place and situation in life: "the first shall be last and the last shall be first." Like an oldest male child (and like George), these first disciples--and especially Peter, James, and John (20:21)--are acutely aware of what they have sacrificed to take on the responsibilities they hold. ("We have left everything to follow you, so what will we have?") That is the set up, the context for Jesus' telling of the parable. The eldest child, the first disciples, and the first workers understand there to be an implicit agreement that the return will be commensurate with the investment of time and labor, that those who work and give more will also get more. But Jesus says that the one who bears ultimate responsibility will also pay the ultimate price (20:17-18). The reward, resurrection life, only comes after crucifixion death. It is this promise--the turning of bankruptcy to restored fortune, shame to praise, oppression to benefaction, mourning song and funeral dirge to festival music and dancing, rejection to acceptance, exhaustion to renewed and inexhaustible capacity for living, hate to love, sorrow to joy and gladness, conflict to reconciliation, judgment and condemnation to redemption and grace, enemies to friends, and disaster to salvation--that is the theme of the song of joy in Zephaniah 3:14-20. The last scene of the movie, the last page of the story is one of restoration and salvation for Job, for George, for Israel, for us, for the disciples--all because also for Jesus himself, crucified and resurrected.

*My covenant group is made up of four great friends from seminary days at PTS, David Casson (Sandia Presbyterian Church, Albuquerque, NM), Jeff Chandler (First Presbyterian Church, Bakersfield, CA), John Hartman (Wake Forest Presbyterian Church, Wake Forest, NC), and Stephen Oglesbee (Clear Lake Presbyterian Church, Houston, TX). We meet every year for conversation, study, prayer, ...and sermon series idea exchange! Thanks, guys.

His Kingdom Is Us?

2 Samuel 23:1-7

It seems somehow fitting that we end the Christian year with the "last words" (dibrey ... ha'acharoniym) of David. If we begin the reading just a verse earlier (2 Samuel 22:51), we also clearly pick up the theme of Christ (meshiycho) the King (malko). God is a tower of salvation for his "king," one who shows steadfast mercy (chesed, loving kindness, covenant loyalty) to his "anointed one." This statement of fact is born out by what follows. David is Israel's quintessential messiah, or anointed king. Now, at the end of his life, the question is whether his last words will bear witness to the truth of the statement about God's faithfulness in 22:51.



(Image Source, http://www.astarte.com.au/assets/images/sketch.jpg)



(Image Source, http://www.astarte.com.au/assets/images/Temple2003.JPG)

The LBA "migdol temple" at Pella provides a glimpse of the concrete "tower" of protection provided by the LORD to his anointed, David. (See 1 Samuel 21:1-8, etc.)

David's "last words" are uttered more as a prophet's oracle (ne'um, or like the Wisdom speeches in the Book of Job) than as a king's command. And it is clear that the power of these words is derivative. David is simply "Jesse's son," who has been raised up, anointed, and loved by Israel's God. The words David speaks are not originally his; they are breathed by the LORD (ruach YHWH) and placed like food on David's tongue. David is merely the chosen and anointed messenger, a singer of divine songs, if you will.



(Image Source, http://iamyouasheisme.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/eat_the_book.jpg)

The Spirit of the LORD who speaks through David's lips here (23:2) is not a stranger to the leaders of Israel. The Spirit came upon Othniel and Jephthah, on Sampson and even upon Saul, who was David's predecessor. But none of them was so thoroughly marked by the Spirit for kingship as David. David was Israel's king and anointed one par excellence.



(Dura Europos, Syria. Source: Gill/Gillerman slide collection. Image Source, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Samuel_e_david.jpg)

1 Samuel 16:13, "Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the presence of his brothers; and the spirit of the LORD came mightily upon David from that day forward. Samuel then set out and went to Ramah." (NRSV)

Even for kings there is a higher authority to whom they are accountable. There is a right way and a wrong way to rule. Those who rule in accord with universal human rights (ba'adam tsaddiyq) and with reverence toward God (yir'at 'elohiym) are gladly received because of the blessing they bring to their subjects. (23:3)



(Image Source, http://cache.virtualtourist.com/2318769-Morning_light-Walpole.jpg)

Such kings are like the morning light; their advancing presence clears away fear and darkness. Their presence means a day without clouds overhead, a day in which the morning mist glistens on the grass as a brilliantly sparkling display of God's blessing. The morning light allows the dew to linger a while. A morning sun warms but does not scorch. It is a welcome ray that drives away the chill of night. (23:4)

David asks, rhetorically, "Is my house [= my royal family; see II Samuel 7:11-12] not thus with God?" The answer he seeks is "Yes! Of course it is! Long live King David!" And David lines up evidence to support his claim of royal benevolence:

• God has made an everlasting covenant (beriyt `olam, II Samuel 7) with David and with his descendants. (Would God do that, if David had not been a good king?)
  
• God has kept things orderly and rule-y while David has been on the throne. (Despite attempts, there has not been a coup d'état. David has reigned a good long time.)
  
• God has (or will) prosper David's help (salvation) and desire (wants).

(23:5)

A worthless [king], on the other hand, is as welcome as a thorn. (Judges 9:7-15)



(Image Source, http://www.hubbo.com/images/2002-05-22/thorny-shrub-close.jpg)

No one wants to get close. No one wants to keep them. (Or their children who come to the throne after them.) Everyone throws them away, because they cannot be held in the hand without getting hurt. (23:6)



(Image Source, https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg0_xxCqcgkiGGyQ7v_w2Revxo1NqETKBle-hZ9ox8OKA8O4T6SaZbhe_c0YPuL5_A0QknyALwUQJuO29Y4Oiq5o6MgcSH7XOAwEpBLkzVxT60lOaU0ABezidCpniDDufa3ReS100Jj2ptI/s1600/thorns.jpg and http://www.rosegardeninghelper.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/3104TSX418L._SS400_.jpg)

To touch them at all, one uses metal tools, military tools, that can be manipulated from a distance. (23:7)



(Image Source, http://i.ehow.com/images/GlobalPhoto/Articles/4592155/Prunerosebush_Full.jpg)

They are then burnt "on the spot" (bashebet, where they sit: i.e., on the throne).



(Image Source, http://oaksavannas.org/photos/brambles-burning-013.jpg)

David is surely the former rather than the latter sort of king. David has lived, after all, to give his "last words." He has not been deposed and there is every reason to think that his heir will sit on the throne of Israel. The only question is which heir and whether the heir will follow in David's path as a good king or become thorny. But perhaps David's last words protest too much. There were times when David's actions--and those of his heirs--had brought calamity on his subjects. (With Uriah and Bathsheba, for example, 2 Samuel 11 and 12.)



(Image Source, http://restorationupdates.com/advice-tips-and-hints-to-be-restored/repentance-is-absolutely-important/)

But overall the judgment of Scripture is that David was a good king, a good example for future kings, for "rulers" of all sorts (e.g., elders and pastors in churches), and a prophetic glance at what comes next.

Revelation 1:4b-8

The revelation of Jesus Christ makes as clear as can be, as clear as flesh-and-blood, who is the authority behind all earthly authorities, the king of all kings, the "ruler of the kings of the earth." There is a right way and a wrong way to rule. His is the right way. His rule produces for his subjects:

• Grace
  
• Peace
  
• Life (from the dead)
  
• Faithfulness (the equivalent of chesed, covenant loyalty)
  
• Love
  
• Freedom

We expect this of a good king, the very best king. We expect that his reign will be long. An eternal covenant or politic can only be maintained by a king (or royal family) who is and was and will be the beginning and the end, the alpha and the omega. What may come as a bigger surprise to us is that we all are his subjects. We are his kingdom. (1:6) We, like David, are his "last words" to the world, priests (more so now than prophets).



(Image Source, http://frmarkdwhite.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/crown.jpg)

The question is whether we, Christ's heirs (or co-heirs with Christ), will embrace our crown (3:11) and our calling, bringing grace, peace, life, faithfulness, love, and freedom to our world, so that he may be welcomed by all.

John 18:33-37

This scene hardly needs an introduction. Jesus stands in Pilate's headquarters, in front of Pilate's judgment seat (throne), a good ruler under arrest by tyrants. Pilate, an earthly "king," claims to stand outside Jesus' jurisdiction. ("I am not a Jew, am I?")



(Image Source, http://www.cts.edu/ImageLibrary/Images/story/pilate.jpg)

Pilate claims that Jesus' own subjects (your nation and your chief priests) have handed Jesus over to him. The implication seems to be that Jesus is a bad king, if he is indeed a king at all. But Jesus objects that his kingdom is not of this world, not from here. The venue for Jesus' trial--and vindication--is elsewhere. That where seems to be a place where kings embrace thorny subjects and undergo severe punishment so that those they rule may go free. Pilate, perhaps thinking that he has trapped Jesus, says "So you are a king?" Jesus does not answer directly. (Nothing new about that!) But he appeals to the primary attribute and calling of a good king, the ability to judge his subjects on objective (Truth) grounds. A good judge is just ('adam tsaddiyq) and has a great reverence toward (fears) God. Unlike David, whose jurisdiction is limited to Israel, Jesus' reign extends to all who recognize the truth of his "last words."

Fighting Over Jesus

1 Samuel 1:4-20

Mark 13:1-8

This passage immediately follows the scene of the widow with her two coppers. (Last week's reading, Mark 12:28-34.) For a while now Jesus has been teaching in the temple, saying some provocative things. In Mark 11 he makes his not-too-subtle entry into Jerusalem, borrowing a colt for his purpose with hardly a "by your leave." ("The Lord needs it...," 11:3.) He curses the fig tree. ("May no one ever eat fruit from you again," 11:14.)



(Image source, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/33/Miracleofthefig.jpg)



(Image source, http://www.dkimages.com/discover/previews/795/396066.JPG)

He drives out those who are buying and selling in the temple, overturning the tables of the money changers, not allowing anyone to carry anything through the temple, 11:15-16. When he does finally start teaching, Jesus accuses those to whom he is speaking of turning what should be a house of prayer for all nations (gentiles and Jews) into a den of robbers.



(Image source, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Wypedzenie.jpg)

Jesus so angers the leadership with his words and deeds that they want to kill him. Perhaps Jesus is tailoring his message to the crowds (11:18), to provoke their leaders, but the message in private to his disciples is equally provocative (to Peter [11:21ff.], "believe!" and "forgive!"; in private [13:3], some will claim "I am he!"]). Jesus is blatantly confrontational, even combative, seeking to "divide and conquer" the leaders who come to question the authority for his words and actions. His question is designed to produce a civil war. Riddle me this: "Was John's baptism of human origin or was it from God?" And the question produces its desired effect. (11:27-33)

Jesus attacks the leaders obliquely, obscuring his meaning momentarily with parables, but they understand all too well that he is "telling the parable against them." (Mark 12:12) Again they want to arrest him, but put it off. They send instead some smart folks to try to trap him using his own methods, asking him a divisive question: "Is it lawful to pay taxes to the emperor or not? Should we pay them or should we not?"



(Image Source, http://www.romancoins.info/h2005-mint-tiberius2.jpg)

Jesus' answer to their question, based on an inspection of a denarius, punts the ball back to them: "Give to Caesar what belongs to him and to God what belongs to God." After so deftly handling this dispute between the Pharisees and the Herodians, in which he leaves them bickering still about whether to pay taxes, Jesus is asked another litmus-test question by some Sadducees: which of seven brothers will have the barren wife on the day of resurrection? This time Jesus tells his questioners bluntly, not once but twice, that they are quite wrong--and ignorant of the Scriptures. (Mark 12:24, 27)

Another person, a professional, overhearing this dispute between Jesus and the Sadducees, brings to him yet another divisive question: "Which is the greatest commandment?" It so happens that this person agrees with Jesus' answer completely, verbatim. Yes, yes, Jesus, you are so right! And so what does Jesus say? Does he congratulate the man? No. Jesus says, "almost there! You are very near the Kingdom, not very far at all to go now." In other words, "close, but no cigar!" (Mark 12:34) That shut them all up.

Now Jesus, in the temple, turns his attention to the widow woman with two coppers making her way toward the offering plate. (See last week's Bible blog entry.) You might ask how Jesus could ever possibly make a controversial statement about a widow's offering, yet he does: "She has given more than all the rest," he says. (Mark 12:43)

Thankfully, time has now come to leave the temple, before Jesus can stir up even more animosity and trouble. That's where our reading today began.



(Image Source, http://jameswwatts.net/REL%20302%20notes/2TempleModel1.jpg)

On their way out, the disciples remark on the edifice and the stones that went into it; and Jesus, unable to let their comment pass, says "Not one of these stones will be left standing on top of another. All of them will be thrown down flat on the ground." (13:2)



(Image Source, http://adamhamilton.cor.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/temple-ruins1.jpg)

Their shock at Jesus' words is evident in the way Peter, James, John, and Andrew huddle with Jesus, expressing their concern. Tell us when; what will be the sign that the things you have said are about to happen? But instead of telling them when it will happen, Jesus gives them a list of signs that the end has not yet happened. (Mark 13:7, 8) There are miles to go before we sleep. Jesus seems to be saying that until the end comes, conflict will be ubiquitous. Wherever we look in our relationships--between nations, between families (and within families!), with nature, in church (wherever!) there will be disagreement, conflict, strife, natural disasters, suffering, pain, and loss. These things will be with us, unavoidably, until the very end. If Jesus, the Son of Man, the Messiah, did not escape it or avoid it but endured it, persevered and even embraced it--where does that leave us, his disciples? If Jesus is headed toward the cross, perhaps his increasing assertiveness in these last few chapters of Mark in the face of those who oppose him is a model for how we are to live in these contentious times. Where and how are we called to account? Asked divisive questions. Pursued with malice because of the way we answer? And especially, where are these things true not just because that's the way life is, but because we follow a troublemaker who isn't willing to let the status quo ante (i.e., death) prevail?

Poor Providers

In today's texts we meet two "poor providers," Naomi (and her foreign daughter-in-law Ruth) and the unnamed woman who cast the Widow's Mite into the temple treasury.

Ruth 3:1-5; 4:13-17

The widow Naomi declares that she will seek "a resting place" (manoach, NRSV says "some security") for her widowed daughter-in-law, Ruth, so that everything will be OK for Ruth. (She had already blessed both Ruth and Orpah with rest, releasing them to find husbands in their native land; see Ruth 1:9.) Now, until and unless there is a change in Ruth's circumstance, she (and, for that matter, Naomi) is and will continue to be like the dove that Noah released from the window of the ark after the flood, "to-ing and fro-ing," but finding no resting place because all of the landing places are still covered with water. (Genesis 8:9)






(Image source, http://www.josephmillersculpture.com/images/dove-over.jpg)



Ruth, the foreigner from Moab, will be lost in Israel just like the people of Israel were once lost in Egypt--and just like exiles who have been dispossessed for reasons of disobedience: scattered from nation to nation, worshiping with strangers, finding no ease, having no resting place, constantly walking without stopping, moving on to avoid the authorities, life constantly in doubt, with heart murmurs, blurry eyes, depression, and a total lack of confidence. Her desperation will become so great that she'll try to sell herself as a slave, but find no takers. (Deuteronomy 28:62-68; see Lamentations 1:3; return to the Land of Promise and settlement there is rest, Joshua 21:43-22:8.)





(Image source, http://archives.starbulletin.com/2007/02/04/editorial/art1x.jpg)



Ruth will be like the driven-out Lilith, finally finding a place of repose. (Isaiah 34:14)





(Image source, http://www.artsjournal.com/artopia/images/kikismith-lilith-1994.jpg)





(Image source, http://www.arthistoryarchive.com/arthistory/christian/images/JeanFrancoisMillet-Harvesters-Resting-Ruth-and-Boaz-1850-53.jpg)



Ruth will be like the simple person, inexperienced in the ways of wisdom, who gets into trouble. In desperate straits, in mourning, she will be like the Psalmist who calls out, "the sorrows of death compassed me, and the pains of hell gat hold upon me: I found trouble and sorrow." (KJV, Psalm 116:3) She will be brought low and then saved by God--in this case, Naomi's God--and by Naomi. But when all is said and done, when Naomi has helped her find "some security," Ruth will also be able to pray the thanksgiving portion of the Psalm: "Return, O my soul, to your rest; for the LORD has been good to you." (Psalm 116:6) Naomi and Ruth together are like the ark of God--which travels here and there, and is sometimes captured in a foreign land. It may be viewed as a curse in Philistia, but it scatters blessing wherever it may go in Israel, until it comes finally to rest in Jerusalem during the reign of Ruth's descendant, King David. (1 Chronicles 6:16)

Naomi knows, and shares, the desperate plight of her daughter-in-law Ruth. Given the cultural milieu, Naomi is in fact poorer and more desperate than Ruth. Naomi has an additional disadvantage, her age, which prevents her from childbirth. (Ruth 1:11) But Naomi also has an advantage; she is a native widow. Therefore it takes their cooperation, the sharing of their relative strengths and assets (Ruth's youth and Naomi's pedigree), to move the story toward its redemptive end. Nevertheless, it is Naomi who takes the initiative to provide protection for Ruth (and for herself), an initiative that should rightfully have been taken by the man in the story, the go'el, or near kinsman and redeemer. (Boaz is referred to as "our 'kin,'" moda`at, which is not so precise a connection as to invoke the law of the Levirate Marriage. But note the strong connection to the story of Tamar in Genesis 38; see Ruth 4:12.) Naomi tells Ruth to take advantage of the showers at the shelter in order to make herself presentable, perfuming (How much did that cost? Mark 14:3, John 12:3), and going by night to the threshing floor, concealing herself in a cloak until Boaz has eaten his meal and drunk his wine. (Ruth 3:2-3)





(Image source, http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2348/2280616209_65c78095ee.jpg)



Given the well-known Hebrew euphemisms ("feet" = sexual parts [see Exodus 4:25, Isaiah 6:2] and "lie down" = have sexual relations [too many to cite]), there is clearly a strong sexual innuendo in Ruth 3:4. But the writer never tells us explicitly "what actually happened on the threshing floor." [Gray, Joshua, Judges, and Ruth (New Century Bible), p. 309] That makes for a better story, it holds us in greater suspense.

When the suspense is resolved, Ruth has born a child--for Naomi (Ruth 4:16; compare Hagar and Sarah, Genesis 16). Each woman has been for the other the conduit for God's blessing, receiving in the process more than she has given. There are royal overtones (Psalm 2:7, Isaiah 9:6), which carry through directly (Ruth 4:17) to David and indirectly (Matthew 1, Luke 3) to Jesus. Through each poor widow God has blessed the other, and through the both of them together God has blessed the nation, and indeed the world.

Mark 12:38-44

One of the foremost indictments in Jesus' teaching against the Teachers of the Law is their appetite: they routinely devour the resting places of widows like Naomi and Ruth. They eat the hope of the poor for lunch. According to Jesus, there are certain visible signs of their ilk to beware: fancy dress, the use of honorifics ("The Rev. Dr. ...") in public (especially when wheeling and dealing), seats on the governing board of the church, V.I.P. invitations to awards banquets, and the like. These are things we might expect, but they also pray long prayers, which might come to us as something of a surprise. Jesus' conclusion is that such people will get their just desserts: just as Naomi and Ruth were blessed beyond all rightful expectation, so these Teachers of the Law will be cursed (judged guilty) to excess.

Then begins the story of another widow. Jesus sits down to watch people give their temple offering, throwing coins into the collection plate. ("According to Mishnah, Shekalim , 5 there were in the temple 13 such receptacles in the form of trumpets." BDAG, gazophulakion) The clatter must have been noticeable when the rich folk [the aforementioned "Teachers of the Law"] threw in large amounts. It is hard to think of such an act--giving freely to the temple coffers, and thus to the support of the poor, as in any way destructive, but Jesus has already judged it so. He says they are eating the lunch of the woman who appears next in line. But this unnamed widow has the last laugh. Her two coppers together amount to less than a penny; they hardly make a noise as they hit the plate. The disciples, their attention drawn elsewhere, must be summoned to pay attention to the widow. She has given more than all the others who are throwing coins into the plate, Jesus says. They gave the overflow, the parts they didn't need or want. Every cent she gave, she needed. As a homeless person, she gave up her last little bit of security, her last place to rest, her very life.

(Image source, http://www.romanorum.com.au/Info/Articles/Forming%20a%20Collection/Forming%20a%20collection/Bolden-Widows%20mite.jpg)

It is hard to see how, or where, or when this woman has her life restored to her. Certainly the "Teachers of the Law" are not going to help her. I think Jesus must be looking after her like Naomi looked after Ruth, one homeless person helping another, one penniless sojourner staying awake, guarding the underpass while the other catches a moment of sleep. Like Ruth looking at Naomi, Jesus sees something in this widow that reminds him of his Father. By sharing, like the boy with the loaves and fishes, miraculously all are loved: saved, healed, and fed by God's grace.

(Image source, http://www.wcg.org/lit/images/b9/WidowsMite.jpg)

Where does that leave us? In part, we are surely indicted like the "Teachers of the Law." Very few of us by any stretch of the imagination are "widowed" in the sense that these widows were, without even a place to rest, without "some security," Social Security or otherwise. But we are all also experienced in loss and are more or less aware of the severe limits placed on us in this life. As such, we need the sort of help that Naomi gave to Ruth, the help of others who share our plight, and the help of one other in particular, Jesus the Christ.