Today’s Gospel from Mark is a bit more complicated than most people might initially think. The story about the “widow’s mite,” when Jesus and his disciples sit near the Temple and see an impoverished widow put in two coins that in and of themselves are not worth much, but presumably represent a significant portion of the woman’s resources, presents us with a comment from Jesus that has been largely interpreted in one particular way.  Jesus responds to this scene with the line: “Amen, I say to you, this poor widow put in more than all the other contributors to the treasury. For they have all contributed from their surplus wealth but she, from her poverty, has contributed all she had, her whole livelihood.” A classic reading of this remark has rendered the widow a hero, someone worth emulating, a selfless giver who gives until it hurts, and so on. However, this may not be what Jesus is really getting at in this passage.

We cannot read the story about the widow’s offering without taking into consideration the few verses that immediately precede this text.

In the course of his teaching Jesus said to the crowds,
“Beware of the scribes, who like to go around in long robes
and accept greetings in the marketplaces,
seats of honor in synagogues,
and places of honor at banquets.
They devour the houses of widows and, as a pretext
recite lengthy prayers.
They will receive a very severe condemnation.”

Prior to witnessing the widow’s offering, Jesus had been teaching his disciples about some systems of social inequity, of imbalance in the religious, political, and social structures of his day. This is not simply to contrast the wealthy with the poor, those who have a “surplus of wealth” from which they offer their gifts at the Temple versus those who have only their subsistence from which to draw. No, Jesus is painting a much starker picture that is, in effect, more about the wealthy scribes than it is about the poor, destitute widow.

I would venture to say that if you think that this Gospel passage is about the widow or about how honorable the poor are for being generous, you’re missing the point.

The Gospel passage for this Sunday in full (Mark 12:38-44) is a two-parter. In Act I (to borrow the theatrical division popular with NPR’s This American Life) we see a religious and political system that is run by a few wealthy and powerful individuals in the culture. These are the entrepreneurs of the religious establishment, who “as a pretext” to fleecing the poor and the vulnerable “recite lengthy prayers” in show of their religious commitments and to paint the financial exchange as “of God.”

These scribes about which Jesus warns the disciples to be wary use their social location, power, and wealth only for themselves. Sure, Jesus points out, they “give to the church” (to use a modern phrase), but they do so only in the most superficial and painless way. Their real concern is themselves, maintaining their wealth, and shoring up their hegemony at the expense of the poorest and most vulnerable of their time.

Jesus clearly condemns this.

Then we get Act II. Here Jesus and the disciples are hanging out across from the Temple treasury, not necessarily on purpose, but they happen to be there and happen to do a little “people watching.” They see what’s going on, who is offering what. And, as if by chance or coincidence, a poor widow (which was, in truth, the only type of widow, because they were often counted among the poorest, most vulnerable, and voiceless in first-century palestinian society — they have no security, no claim on property, no protection, and little resources) comes and puts in a sum that represents all that she has.

This is not an opportunity to praise the widow, but a chance to lament the disgusting injustice that creates the condition for this scene. The widow’s offering is an illustration of what Jesus was just talking about — the religious, political, and social establishment has systematically corrupted her way of thinking such that she apparently feels compelled to give far beyond what likely hurts her and anyone, say children, that might depend on her.

The real question that lies beneath this Sunday’s Gospel is: What is the reason that someone who has nothing feels compelled to give from that lack to the Temple (or church or charity or whatever)? Who seeks to benefit from this exchange? We know who certainly stands to lose.

A reading of Jesus’s comments that appears to hold the widow up on a pedestal is, I believe, a perpetuation of this injustice that inflicted the widow of Jesus’s time and continues to affect the poor and vulnerable in our day.

A few years back, while reflecting on this reading, I wrote about a New York Times Magazine article that highlighted the myth of philanthropy and the “benefits to the poor” of having the super wealthy (“Today’s Parable of the Widow’s Mite“). What this well-researched article revealed was that the super wealthy, the wealthy and ostentatious “scribes” of today, actually give less than those who have middle and lower incomes. Most absurdly, what Jesus observed in his day remains true today — those with the least continue to give more, by percentage of their resources, than the wealthy!

Jesus is not endorsing this behavior, but blatantly naming it for what it is (especially when we read the full text with vv. 38-40 included about the Scribes) and challenging us to see the structures that allow this to continue. What can we do to make society and the our faith communities more equitable? Why do we let this continue to happen such that the poor give until it hurts and the wealthy seem to so often benefit from this self-defeat of the impoverished?

Hopefully this Sunday we don’t miss the point of the widow’s mite, but instead follow Jesus’s line of thinking and make a difference in our world.

Photo: by Amy Pectol


  1. Great insight, by idealizing the widow’s “goodness” it takes the focus off the economic injustices of the scribes who eagerly “devour” those same widows. We (the nonruling class) have been taught to serve them (the ruling class) and do it from our poverty until it hurts while they give without touching their real wealth.

  2. Dan, I’m concerned that this interpretation may not fully integrate what it means when someone is found to be blessed with the bounty of the kingdom. Jesus may be pointing out the widow as someone who recognizes, as St. Francis did and as the scribes did not, that the blessings of God in the heavenly kingdom far outweighed anything that she or the disciples could attain from the people considered more worthy or better off. Christ was perhaps trying to remind His disciples that all they have comes from God – all is a gift to be received with joy. Thus, the way of Christ shows that this widow is not some hapless victim of society; rather, she is someone who recognized God’s presence in her life because of (or despite) her poverty. She is not so much hapless as a revelation of someone who is completely and utterly dependent upon God (who is always trustworthy). In that way, she would be called one of the anawim or “lowly ones” of God. Mary, the Mother of God, was described in just the same way. While society did need (and does indeed today) to change its ways so as to better reflect the kingdom of heaven here on earth, it can only do when it is able to perceive how all things are a gift and blessing from God. In that way, her love for God is revealed in the way she is able to give everything she has for His sake and for the sake of His people. It would thus prepare the disciples to better understand the love God has for His Son, when He is sent to die upon the cross.

    1. Hi Nancy,

      I appreciate your interpretation, but my post is rooted in the scholarly commentaries of the text itself — yes, there is something to be said for giving of one’s self, certainly an important move, but as the theological tradition has shown (and most people ignore) there is a difference between abject poverty (widows in first-century palestine society) and evangelical poverty (Francis of Assisi, Jesus of Nazareth, Mary, etc.). Jesus in vv. 38-40 makes it clear that the wealthy and the powerful are the systemic cause of this abject poverty. Jesus never hails the widow as virtuous, but merely states the obvious — she give more in relation to what she has when compared to those who give from their surplus. Much to think about here.

      Peace and good!

      1. Brother Daniel, Your essay was an inspiration to me. I couldn’t agree more even as I see the good in the simple act of giving which can heal not only the poor and sick, but the giver as well. May I link your essay to the poem it inspired? I would present it as it’s own link to your essay separate from the poem. I feel the message in your essay needs to be heard more. Thanks much for writing it. RR

      2. Thank you for your insight I read the same thing. It helps me feel less crazy about it. I read not to interpret but comprehend.

  3. There is a similar, but stronger, interpretation which is suggested in Ched Myers BINDING THE STRONG MAN. The woman doesn’t “feel” compelled to give but that she is “being impoverished by her obligations to the temple cultus.” Because the leaders “devour the estates of widows” they are responsible for her poverty and for impoverishing herself even more by put her last two pennies. As Myers says, “scribal piety has been debunked as a thin veil for economic opportunism and exploitation.” (p. 321)

  4. I just ran across this angle of interpretation earlier this week, in pondering what to preach about the passage, and find it intriguing, and, granted the context of the whole passage, fairly convincing. I’ve read that there were a dozen or more offering-places in the “Women’s Court,” each for a different purpose, so it would make a difference which place she was giving the offering, and for what purpose. The passage, clearly, doesn’t tell us that. I want to know whether any more is available about Second Temple practice. Meanwhile, you’ve given a clear and eloquent statement about this ‘take’ on the passage. Thanks.

  5. Your point about yhr commrnt being a lament is even stronger, Fr, Dan, if you follow the context, Right after this, when a disciple praises the Temple, Jesus prophesies that there wuill not be left a stone upon a stone,

  6. OK but the problem that is not being discussed or perhaps avoided, is how should christians respond to this situation as it occurs in our culture today and has in general occurred down the aages (“The poor you will always have with you”). St John Chrysostom advises not to sign up to achieving this through government means (Government are clearly the cause of this problem – most politicians decry poverty and always cry that it can only be solved through government, but they achieve it by impoverishing everyone by ‘fiat’) but through changing the hearts and minds of people to understand that everything comes from God – here is his quote:
    “SHOULD we look to kings and princes to put right the inequalities between rich and poor?
    Should we require soldiers to come and seize the rich person’s gold and distribute it among his destitute neighbors?
    Should we beg the emperor to impose a tax on the rich so great that it reduces them to the level of the poor and then to share the proceeds of that tax among everyone?
    Equality imposed by force would achieve nothing, and do much harm. Those who combined both cruel hearts and sharp minds would soon find ways of making themselves rich again.
    Worse still, the rich whose gold was taken away would feel bitter and resentful; while the poor who received the gold from the hands of soldiers would feel no gratitude, because no generosity would have prompted the gift.
    Far from bringing moral benefit to society, it would actually do moral harm.
    Material justice cannot be accomplished by compulsion, a change of heart will not follow. The only way to achieve true justice is to change people’s hearts first—and then they will joyfully share their wealth.”
    The trap these days is that the church so often gets sucked into ‘collaboration” with the very people Jesus is criticizing, instead of being more focused on the hearts and minds of the flock. I think this is what Jesus was inherently teaching his disciples.

  7. Thank you to Jonathan for his reply. Very intelligent and insightful! It is so hard for me to hear more and more, as time goes by, that Jesus in the New Testament was sent to earth to bring “social justice” to man. “Social Justice” is a man-made concept, not a biblical concept. Thank you again Jonathan, sincerely!

  8. So I guess this means that if you are poor and you give what little you have then it means more to God than if you are rich and gave a lot. So what would this mean to God who doesn’t need money in the first place? Was her offering the only criteria to know her heart? God would already know her heart as well as the rich donor so why does he need an offering of money? To prove their faith when he already knows the depth of their faith or is it really and offering to buy favor with God? In that case then the poor woman’s offering was no more nobler or faithful than the rich one. So the question is did the poor woman give her money to help other poor people or did she give her money to buy favor with God and live in eternal bliss? Then her offering was nothing more than a selfish bribe to acquire immortality in eternal bliss. The question here is simple, would you make an offering at all if there was nothing in it for you? Suppose the rich donor in not faithful and just wanted to help the poor? Then his donation was a selfless offering of kindness, because he did it for the poor and not himself. Just how many of you Christians would give if God offered you nothing?

    1. I don’t think she gave as an investment to receive 10 fold. Perhaps she came to the place in her life where she realized that if all the world had to offer her were two mites that she was willing to give it all up and totally rely on Jesus Christ and what he has to offer her, life and life more abundant. That she recognized that what the world offered her could not sustain life and she didn’t want any part of it anymore. That giving up all she had in this world meant certain physical death yet she was willing to accept that and would simply trust in Jesus for her needs to sustain life .. As for her heart, I do believe it was in the right place because it drew the attention of Jesus. Jesus said what she gave was more than ALL of them that cast into the treasury. She gave up the world and gave him her life and soul … She chose rather to suffer the afflictions of God’s people than to enjoy the pleasures of the world for a season. She realized that if she would seek the kingdom of God first and his righteousness that all else would be added unto her … and perhaps as David she had never seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread. I’m sure there a several lessons to learn in this passage and the lesson that Jesus would impress on our hearts at that given moment would be the one he would have us to see at present and perhaps he would bring another impression at a different point in our lives such as the OP. Just my two cents, no pun intended. May the good Lord gives us our daily bread and wisdom with it to sustain our lives until we meet him in glory … God bless

  9. Nothing esoteric or scholarly from me: Just a simple question: If I am a single woman, divorced, widowed, whatever, living on Social Security and government charity programs like Section 8 housing, do I have to tithe exactly 10 % as my Church demanded. When I pointed out that Social Security was not income or “interest,” two “Elders” quoted the “Widow’s mite.” I didn’t mind giving from the heart but being subject to a Church bookkeeper’s audit once a year is hardly giving from the heart.

    1. Spoken like a true hireling. Serving Jesus is not about serving or giving money to some religious organization that calls itself “church”.
      We shall all stand before Jesus Christ and shall give account to Him who know’s our heart. Wheter we followed Him or just followed writings about Him or bad teachings about Him.
      So many professing christians will be cast out because they tried to follow a book instead of following Jesus by His Holy Spirit which is the nee covenant.
      You want to follow the old covenant? Just remember there’s no grace for you, you will be judged by the law.

      1. The timing is important here. It is only a short 3 days before Jesus will die. Do we sometimes forget that the Father loves His Son so much and that Jesus dreads what He must do that we lose the connection between them. Could it be that the Father is giving His Son a view of what it means to give your all…to give your life? Could this be one way to see this or is it taking to much liberty with the scripture?

    2. If you are in a church that, in any way, makes you feel like you just described….. then you need to find another church. A church should teach about God and his love and mercy go to JP Morgan or Charles Schwab if you need a financial planner.

  10. No – your analysis is incorrect. Yeshua condemns the falsely pious and those who seek the acclaim of men. We know this because “You cannot serve two masters.” The wealthy give from wealth gathered from injustice, while the widow gives from purity of spirit. Appealing to “scholarly” interpretations is no more meaningful than the Pharisees and scribes who were also scholarly.

  11. This passage may shed light on the mission of the church which is clearly to bring hope to the poor who naturally live more on faith to survive than the rich. Our ministry to the poor brings greater dividends as well while including a much greater audience. The church should embrace the hearts of the poor who may be much easier to reach than the hypocritical souls that self profess good works. The soil of the poor ( their hearts) have much greater return and those that seek “the mission” of Jesus would do well to look for greater returns of lost souls and bring to the throne of Christ a sea of thankful hearts. Jesus magnify’s the poor widows faith but she is symbolic of a greater mission to bring ” a cup of water, clothing, healing, hope to the prisoner rather than elevate the proud to be seen with them.

  12. Simply, this widow gave the Lord her all, her everything. Sometimes, we make things harder than they need to be, when all we really need to do is give Him everything.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s