Soon after I arrived at seminary, my classmates and professors began using a word that I had never heard before. Exegesis. To downplay my confusion, I joked that I always thought that Mary Magdalene was the ex-o-Jesus, but nobody laughed then either. Eventually, I learned that exegesis is the critical study and interpretation of a text. I came to appreciate that exegesis is the key to good preaching. Good exegesis has four parts: study around the passage, within the passage, behind the passage, and before and after the passage. I don’t do a full-blown seminary caliber study before every sermon, but I do always try to take time to dig into the scriptures and to see where God is at work.
One important component of exegetical study before and after the text is understanding the history of interpretation. As you might imagine, over the course of two thousand years, these parables, poems, and letters have been read in various ways. Constantine, the Emperor of Rome hears Jesus telling the rich man to sell everything he has and give it to the poor very differently than a medieval widow who lost her husband and children to the plague who hears it very differently than a middle-class white American working 55 hours a week to keep up with a mortgage, car note, and student loan debt. There is much to be gleaned from each of these interpretations, especially for a preacher, like me, whose audience is diverse in background, education, and socio-economic status.
Which brings us to today’s parable that my Bible calls, “The Parable of the Widow and the Unjust Judge.” What a weird story. Throughout the Gospels, Jesus tells some off-putting parables, but this one has to be in the top 5. It is such a challenging story that Luke does his best to help us understand it. In this case, the history of interpretation starts even before the story was written down as the author attempts to help us understand how we should read the story. The preamble to this parable comes at verse one. The author writes, “Jesus told his disciples a parable about their need to pray always and not lose heart.” Ok, so this is going to be a story about persistent prayer. We go into the text ready to associate ourselves with a character who is persistent in prayer only to find that the widow isn’t praying to God, but to a judge who seems to be the exact opposite of God. This judge has no fear of God and no respect for anyone. He says so himself. What are we to do with that?
Jesus tries his hand at interpretating the story as well. After the parable, he says “Will not God grant justice to his chose ones who cry to him day and night? Will he delay long in helping them?” Well, if God is just, then why do we have to cry to God day and night for justice? And two thousand years later, there is still injustice, cruelty, and hatred on earth. Waiting two thousand years seems like maybe God has delayed quite a long time in helping the oppressed. Not to suggest Luke or Jesus are wrong here, but these two interpretations just don’t sit right with me. It feels like we’re missing something. Let’s fast forward and see what else we can find.
The original Biblical texts weren’t divided up into chapter and verse, but by at least the eighth century, scribes were dividing the text into chapters, each with their own titles. Like Luke’s heavy-handed attempt at an explanation, these titles often set the stage for how we are to think about the story that is to follow. This has advantages and disadvantages, of course, but it does help us understand how interpretations have changed as the titles change. As I mentioned earlier, in my Bible, this story is called the “Parable of the Widow and the Unjust Judge,” but before that, it was often called “The Parable of the Importunate Widow.” Importunate is not a word I knew before this week, but it means to be persistent in a bad way, persistent to the point of annoyance. Think of the four-year-old who never stops asking “why” or the totally hypothetical chihuahua named Ruby who wishes for attention and lays on top of your keyboard while you are trying to write a sermon.
As the Parable of the Importunate Widow, like with Luke’s preamble, our attention is meant to be focused on the woman. Her story is a sad one, based on the context clues. She is at least a four-time outcast. First, she’s a woman. Second, she is a widow. Third, because she must go to court herself, we can assume that she has no male relatives at all. Fourth, she pesters, and pesters, and pesters, and pesters. It is this importunate, quadruple outsider that Jesus holds up as the example of faithful persistence. Most importantly, her request of the judge isn’t frivolous, but it is simply for justice. Day after day, she returns to the judge and asks, “grant me justice.” “Grant me justice.” “Grant me justice.” Unlike our prayers, this widow’s petition can’t be done in the comfort of her own home over a cup of coffee. She must work for it. Each morning, she has to get up and go, knowing full well that the judge will likely be deaf to her cries. And yet, she persists. That’s why she’s the model of faith for Jesus. She’s importunate, annoyingly persistent, in her pursuit of justice. At the very end of the passage, Jesus asks, “when the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” In this line of interpretation, I think Jesus is asking, when he returns, will he find disciples whose faith compels them to passionately pursue justice?
As I said, importunate isn’t a word we hear much these days. Most modern Bibles title this “The Parable of the Widow and the Unjust Judge,” which tends to focus our attention on the judge rather than the widow. This judge admits that he doesn’t have respect for people, and he doesn’t care for God. The interpretive lens the title gives us suggests that this means the judge is unjust, but at least two scholars I consulted this week argue that it means he is the totally nonbiased. Either way, his judgements come not from any partiality to his fellow human beings or to the will of God, but instead wholly from within himself.
We don’t know why the judge repeatedly refused to hear the cries of the widow, but out of his own mouth we learn why he finally relents, “Because this widow keeps bothering me, I will grant her justice, so that she may not wear me out by continually coming.” Here’s another place where the history of interpretation matters. Translators make interpretive decisions all the time. The NRSV and most modern translations say something like “wear me out,” but the Greek word actually means “to bruise, to beat up, or to give a black eye.” Whether the judge was afraid of a black eye literally or figuratively is an open question, but the reality is that he ultimately granted her justice to shut her up, such was the veracity of her persistence. Jumping back to that final verse, when Jesus asks, “When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” we might hear him saying, “when I return, will I find folks have been fighting day after day to bring about the Kingdom of Heaven?”
No matter who we focus on or how we interpret this story, the question that Jesus poses at very end seems to be an important one. This is a parable about the fullness of time, and how we, as disciples, are called to live in the meantime. “When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?” Will Jesus find importunate people pursuing justice? Will Jesus find disciples fighting for what’s right? When Jesus returns, will he find us persistent in work and prayer for the building up of the Kingdom of Heaven? Amen.