One who is faithful in a very little is also faithful in much, and one who is dishonest in a very little is also dishonest in much. If then you have not been faithful in the unrighteous wealth, who will entrust to you the true riches? And if you have not been faithful in that which is another's, who will give you that which is your own? No servant can serve two masters… You cannot serve God and money.
Jesus of Nazareth
Jesus of Nazareth gave the above warning when he confronted the religious establishment of his day over their love of money. The ‘little’ he referred to is material wealth gained through a love of money; the ‘much’ is spiritual wealth that is, ultimately, true riches. I’ve already made the point in this series of Reflections that our attitude to money and the ways we use it are part of our character development and influence what responsibility we will have in the Kingdom of Heaven: everyone will get the responsibility they can handle. In last weekend’s Reflections, I mentioned the two parables where Jesus explained this that are recorded in Matthew 25:14-30 and Luke 19:12-28.
In both parables, a man going abroad gives resources to his servants. In one of the parables, three servants get different amounts, which I think refers to our individual talents and gifts; in the other, ten servants all receive one mina (or pound), which I think refers to the Gospel message we all have. On his return, the man rewards his servants with varying degrees of responsibility, based on what they did in his absence.
The parable in Matthew is the third of three illustrations in which Jesus explains the responsibilities of his followers between his ascension and return. The servant given five talents makes five more, the one given three makes three more but the servant given just one talent buries it in the ground for fear of displeasing his master. The master had distributed the talents according to each servant’s ability, so that the two who returned double did equally well but the servant who returned only the one that he’d been given was rebuked. All he had needed to do to be equally successful was to return just one more.
Jesus repeated the lesson in the parable that Luke records because his followers still thought his mission would culminate at Jerusalem with his proclamation as King and the immediate overthrow of Roman rule. Of the ten servants each given a pound (or mina), we hear only how well three of them did. One returned ten times as much and another returned five times but one of them returned to his master only the one that he’d been given. Like the servant in the other parable, he’d hidden what he’d been given and was rebuked. And he gave the same excuse: that his master was a severe man whom he feared.
In both parables, the masters turned the excuses back on their useless servants. 'I will condemn you with your own words, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking what I did not deposit and reaping what I did not sow? Why then did you not put my money in the bank, and at my coming I might have collected it with interest?'
I’m sure that neither master was agreeing with his servant’s assessment but only saying that if the servants had really believed them to be severe men, they should at least have acted consistent with that belief. They should have deposited with bankers what they had been given, so their masters could have at least received interest on the money.
To invest the money like this would have been far from ideal. Interest, called usury across the ancient world and forbidden in the Torah, was widely considered immoral even where it was legal. Only severe men who hoped to reap what they had not sown took interest. But if the servants had really believed what they said about their masters, the interest would have been better than nothing at all!
Consider this. When the useless servants hid what they had been given to trade with, what did they live on? Perhaps I’m pushing my application of the parables a little too far, but I hope you will see what I’m getting at. The servants who traded presumably earned enough to live on and gave to their masters the net profit. After all, businesspeople throughout history have used some of their profit for food, housing, clothing and other living costs. But what did the servants who didn’t trade live off? Did they forget whose servants they were and hire themselves out to other masters? Did they beg?
So with us. If we don’t ‘trade’, or live, with what God has given us, what are we living on? Have we forgotten whose servants we are? If we follow the ways of society, are we actually serving money and not God?
The Sermon on the Mount describes how we love God with our whole being and love our neighbours as ourselves. But if we don’t live that way, and if we allow money a disproportionate influence in our lives, so that it distracts us from the Gospel and compromises our discipleship – what then? Are we in fact useless servants who hide what God has given us to live on?
If you’ve been tracking your spending, as I’ve described in the past two Reflections, please keep it up. I plan to explain how to use the information next weekend.
© All Souls Clubhouse Community Centre & Church and Philip Evans 2014.
Please feel free to copy, print and share these Reflections on a non-profit basis.
