Luke 14:7-14

     Jesus seems to have been one of fairly large group who is having a meal at the home of a leader among the Pharisees. An observant man, he notices how the guests at the party were choosing places of honor. Today’s world is informal but there are still situations where seating may reflect either the importance of the individual, their official position in the group, or their degree of intimacy with the central host or honoree. At a wedding reception, family and closest friends may be seated at the same table or one near to the bride and groom, etc.
     Jesus, of course, was familiar with people who wanted to feel important--his own disciples had a few issues in that direction. So he told a parable. This parable is begun a little differently than some that Jesus related. It starts with a hypothetical situation...suppose you went to a wedding feast. He asks them to consider what could happen there. Someone assumes he is important and takes a seat that reflects it. But suppose someone else arrives who is considered more important by the host? Imagine how embarrassing it would be for that person to be asked to take a seat with lower status. Far better, says Jesus, to take the seat of lower honor in the room, only to be urged by the host to take a position of greater distinction.
     Jesus concludes by pointing out that those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.
      His final comment ties this parable with other parables and teachings about reversal. It evokes things such as “blessed are the poor.” Or Mary’s song before the birth of Jesus, recorded in Matthew.
      It is possible, of course, that his words at first might have been interpreted by those listening as an almost humorous, perhaps ironic bit of advice on how to better play the game of social positioning. But this interpretation would be overset by his next comment. Even a host of a dinner party is playing that game of position and honor and expectation of a return benefit. Jesus was aware of this, so he tells them that when they had a party, rather than inviting those who can give them something in return, they should invite those who are poor, the lame, the crippled and the blind. Such unfortunate people can do offer nothing in return. By this they will receive blessings at the time of the resurrection of the righteous.
      The question of honor or benefit for our actions is one that is deeply complicated and ambiguous in our motives. Even while trying our best to do the right thing, ego or personal need may get involved. A college professor used to say that, for example, we give money to causes to keep certain things away from us. We may give to help research on arthritis or cancer because we don’t want it to trouble us or our loved ones. Someone who is wealthy may give expecting respect or honor because of their gift. The complication is that giving can also be a form of witness. The generosity of one often inspires others to give. The wise individual who is interested in their spiritual health, will want to be aware of their own mixed motives. A laugh about it also seems healthy, for in trying to be humble, for example, we may get prideful over our depth of humility. The individual who tries hard to do nothing that will win favor or benefits from earthly sources, may also be acting on a quid pro quo expectation with God, expecting good health, happiness, or a “crown in heaven.”
     How mixed motives can get is illustrated in some books of inspirational writings. There are some in which the author tells of their struggle to move up to the biblical expectation of tithing (giving ten percent of one’s income to the work of God). The authors often tell of how their business or income increased every time they gave more. Or there may be a more “spiritual” benefit described. The intention is to encourage people to be generous because it is worthwhile.
      It is ironic that at a mission conference some years ago, one of the leaders urged people to give money generously to people on the streets (someone who asks for help). Some people were concerned and raised the question of whether it would be used for drugs or alcohol rather than for food or shelter. Give without considering that, they were told, give because it is good for your spiritual health. The thinking on this seemed faulty to many people there. They agreed that generous giving was important. It’s important because those who have enough (and usually more than enough) should share of their resources to help the poor, homeless, or ill. It is good for the soul to be generous. But to give without considering how to make the gift effective for the needs of others, and to do it just because it will make the giver fee good, seemed selfish and counterproductive on every level.  It also may divert resources from those who are truly hungry. If someone gives all they have to a man who will use it to feed an addiction, then what of the hungry family who is living in their car? It is easy to give money and pat oneself on the back for generosity. It is harder work to find out how to give wisely. One charitable foundation in the modern world has been criticized at times for coolly calculated how many results it will get for each dollar spent. No one can or has the right to judge the interior motives of those in charge, but it can be observed that they are trying to spend money wisely and do the greatest possible good with the considerable number of dollars they are spending.
      No doubt Jesus would have sympathy with the difficulties the person of conscience may have with whether they are truly giving selflessly, or whether they are secretly (secret even to themselves) giving for ego, status, or some other benefit. He might simply tell us to continue being generous and trying to be effective; don’t let our possibly mixed motives become an excuse for slacking off.
     The whole question of status is complicated. In one part of the world, missionaries taught converts to be humble and that poverty was spiritually healthy. But because the Christians in that culture have the lowest worldly status, in today’s world they and their faith are not respected. That may be fine for their spiritual health, but what of their witness?
      Another situation to consider: No person can abandon the need for public recognition if they are seeking political office. But a good person in politics can do great good.

How much soul searching about mixed motives is helpful?
Can we seek status in the world for good purposes without losing our spiritual compass?
How do we keep a passion for doing good?