If you come down to the river, Bet you gonna find some people who live. You don't have to worry cause you have no money, People on the river are happy to give.
This verse from "Proud Mary," by the group Creedence Clearwater Revival, expresses a somewhat surprising truth. People who have very little are often more willing to share what they have with others than people who have a lot are. When God sent the prophet Elijah to Zarephath to find relief from the drought, he encountered a widow who had just enough food for one last meal for herself and her son. At Elijah's urging, however, she provided a morsel of food for Elijah as well, and God blessed her with an abundance of food for her faithfulness. The woman was a widow, a person with low social standing and little earning potential in Israelite society, and her son was an orphan. He was not really an orphan by our modern definition, since he still had his mother, but he was fatherless, which put him in the same category as his mother: on the fringes of society. We call children like this today "at risk" children. They fill our schools and streets, and they can be found in cities and in rural areas. The amazing part of this story to me is not the miraculous provision of food. God can always be counted on to provide for those in need. The miraculous part of the story for me is the widow's willingness to put herself and her son at further risk by sharing their food with a stranger. The story raises an important and challenging question for all of us who have relative security in society. How much are we willing to risk to share with those in need?
In the wake of the U.S. elections this week, the British newspaper The Guardian printed an editorial entitled, "Thank You, America." The editorial said, "On Tuesday, in the midterm US congressional elections, American voters rebuffed Mr Bush in spectacular style and with both instant and lasting political consequences." It goes on to speak of the many positive effects that the elections will have on U.S. relations with the rest of the world. I hope that the author of this editorial is right about the positive consequences, but Christian supporters of the Democratic resurgence should not be too anxious to put their trust in any political party. We must remember that the Republicans also came to power in 1994 in the wake of Democratic scandals, and they too promised to clean up government. Before long, however, they were enmeshed in innumerable scandals involving money, power, and sex. The psalmist reminds us where our trust lies. "Do not put your trust in princes, in mortals, in whom there is no help. . . . Happy are those whose help is the God of Jacob, whose hope is in the Lord their God." We may identify ourselves with a political party whose platform and performance approximates our own understanding of proper behavior, but we must never forget that our ultimate trust lies only in God. Having said that, however, one way in which we should determine which candidates or political parties to support is to see which ones hew to the example set by God, as detailed by the psalmist. "[It is the Lord who] executes justice for the oppressed; who gives food to the hungry. The Lord sets the prisoners free; the Lord opens the eyes of the blind. The Lord lifts up those who are bowed down; the Lord loves the righteous. The Lord watches over the strangers; he upholds the orphan and the widow, but the way of the wicked he brings to ruin." If you can find a candidate who advocates policies that reflect God's attitude, as expressed in these verses, vote for her!
It is in vogue in some circles in the West today to adopt one of the Eastern views of the afterlife, the idea of reincarnation. The idea behind classical Hindu and Buddhist theories of reincarnation is that people's actions during their lifetime determine their fate in the next. This is known as the Law of Karma. If people live good lives, their next life will be better in some tangible way, but if they live evil lives, they will suffer the consequences in their next life. The popularity of reincarnation among Western people can be explained in part by their desire to escape death. For them, life is good, and they hope their next life will be equally enjoyable. In contrast to this positive evaluation of reincarnation, the traditional understanding of it in the East is that it is something from which people wish to escape. For them, life is typically hard and full of pain, so reincarnation is a curse rather than a blessing. The Jewish and Christian understanding of the afterlife is quite different from the common Eastern view. In today's reading from Hebrews, the author expresses the classical Judeo-Christian view succinctly: "It is appointed for mortals to die once, and after that the judgment." With reincarnation, mistakes of this life, even serious ones, can be rectified in the next. If we're only given one shot at life, however, it is absolutely essential that we make the most of it. Hebrews says that Christ's sacrifice on our behalf is eternally efficacious, and our confidence in this promise gives us hope to live our lives to the fullest before God. If this life is all we have, it is not a dress rehearsal but rather a live performance. How will the critics, especially the one who really matters, judge our performance?
My brother and his family recently moved to a small town called Buda. I had seen signs to Buda on the Interstate highway that I've driven on dozens of times, and I always figured that it was just a variant spelling of Buddha, though I did wonder whether there were a large number of Buddhists who had founded the city. My brother asked around and found a different explanation. Buda, which is pronounced byooda, is apparently a corrupt spelling of the Spanish word viuda, which means "widow." It seems that the town was named after a widow or widows who lived in the area. The Wikipedia article on the town says that several widows worked in the local hotel, which was informally called the "Buda House." Today's Gospel reading from Mark describes a poor widow who put two small copper coins as an offering into the receptacles destined for the temple treasury. Jesus commented that she had put in "everything she had, all she had to live on," in contrast to the rich, who put in only what they thought they could spare. If we believe that everything we have belongs to God, we will spend our money differently. We are critical of members of Congress who waste taxpayer dollars, but are we equally critical of ourselves for our stewardship of God's money? It's not that we can't spend anything on ourselves, but we shouldn't get in the habit of spending everything we have on ourselves. The widow could undoubtedly have put those two copper coins to good use for herself, but she wanted to give them instead to God. May we have the courage, and the faith, to do the same with the possessions God has given us.