Mark has Jesus conclude his remarks against the scribes by saying they devour widows’ houses (their inheritance), and all the while offering long, pompous prayers (Mark 12:40). What Jesus had in mind concerned the scribes and Pharisees trading upon their reputations in the community, exalting their own positions. A prominent scribe was often able to gain control of a widow’s inheritance by becoming her wise executor in financial matters. Thus, he was able to exalt his own status at the expense of the widow. Josephus also records such an event in describing how the Pharisees helped King Alexander’s widow, saying: “They had the enjoyment of the royal authority, while the expenses and the difficulties of it belonged to Alexandra…”[1] Thus, did they devour their wealth, and “these”, i.e., the scribes and Pharisees who did these things, would receive the greater judgment from God (Mark 12:40).
Matthew’s stunning account of Jesus’ rebuke of the scribes and Pharisees is longer than Mark’s and Luke’s, but he concludes his critique with judgment upon the nation, foretelling of the destruction of Jerusalem (Matthew 23:37-39), saying Jerusalem was responsible for killing the prophets and stoning the servants of the Lord that were sent to her. Therefore, her House, i.e., her Temple, was left unto her desolate (verse-39). On the other hand, both Mark and Luke mention a widow placing her two mites into the Temple treasury (Mark 12:41-44; Luke 21:1-4), and this event is bookended on the one side with Jesus’ critique of the scribes and Pharisees, and on the other with judgment upon Jerusalem in the Olivet Prophecy. What should we make of this?
According to Mark, Jesus was seated in the Temple treasury, which was located in the court of women, and he observed folks, as they deposited their offerings into the Temple collection chests. There were thirteen chests in the Temple each dedicated to a certain type of offering (some alms, others for Temple supplies etc.). Each chest was in the shape of a trumpet, narrow at the top and broad at the bottom, and this was done to prevent theft of the contents.[2] Hence Jesus’ words: “when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men” (Matthew 6:2). Jesus’ saying, however, must be taken figuratively, because there is no such tradition mentioned in Jewish literature of anyone blowing a trumpet as he gave alms to the poor.
Probably, Jesus used the expression in light of the shape of the collection chests, and the proclivity of some to draw attention to their good deeds, as is noted elsewhere in scripture: “Most men will proclaim everyone his own goodness: but a faithful man who can find?” (Proverbs 20:6). How this was done is a matter of opinion. Perhaps, these wealthy men called the poor to himself in a manner that drew attention of others, so, while he did his good deed, he was also admired by his peers. The point is, however, in the context of Jesus’ mention of the widow in the Temple (Mark 12:41-42), nothing was done to alleviate her condition. If two mites were all she had, and she placed those in one of the treasury chests of the Temple, how was she overlooked by the wealthy who, as far as appearances were concerned, seemed so willing to do good deeds? Thus, in a sense, the poor widow sounded the trumpet of the hypocrisy of all the wealthy who neglected her (cp. Deuteronomy 15:7-11) in their desire to bring attention to themselves.
Therefore, Jesus’ earlier remarks about the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees (Mark 12:38-40; cp. Luke 12:1) are displayed in this scene, for they say and do not (Matthew 23:2-3). Certainly, the teachers of the Law knew what was recorded in Deuteronomy 15:7-11, and, no doubt, the scribes and Pharisees taught it in the synagogues, but what was the result? Since they did everything to be seen of men (Matthew 23:5), so those who were taught by them did likewise. If they couldn’t draw attention to themselves in the good deeds they did, that good was neglected, and this is understood in the context of the widow’s mites being given away (Mark 12:41-44). So, on the one hand the hypocrisy of the scribes and Pharisees is seen in the fact that the widow wasn’t cared for, despite what was written in the Law. Therefore, as a result, Jerusalem would be judged, and the thirteen chests in the Temple treasury would be destroyed with the Temple (cp. Matthew 23:37-39).
_________________________________________________________
[1] See Josephus, Wars of the Jews, 1.5.2 (110-111).
[2] According to the Jerusalem Talmud: Tractate Shekalim, chapter 2 MISHNA (a): “money-chests were on the order of horns in the city of Jerusalem.” [footnote to the shape of the chests: “The money-chests were narrow on one side and broad at the bottom, and had a slot through which a Darkon on edge only could be passed, and were given to the messenger locked”]. Similarly the Babylonians Talmud, Tractate Shekalim, chapter 2 MISHNA: “SHEKELS MAY BE CHANGED INTO DARICS IN ORDER TO [LIGHTEN] THE LOAD OF THE JOURNEY. JUST AS THERE WERE CHESTS IN THE TEMPLE SO WERE THERE CHESTS IN THE PROVINCE. [footnote for ‘chests’: “Heb. ‘Shoferoth’ horns of blowing. The chests were shaped like the Shofar, narrow at the top where the opening was, and widening lower down. This shape was chosen to prevent the theft of the contents.”
Smoodock's Blog 