Luke 16:10

Luk_16:10-13

Faithful in that which is least

On living to God in small things

1.

Notice how little we know concerning the relative importance of events and duties. We use the terms great and small in speaking of actions, occasions, plans, and duties, only in reference to their mere outward look and first impression. Some of the most latent agents and mean-looking substances in nature are yet the most operative; but yet, when we speak of natural objects, we call them great or small, not according to their operativeness, but according to size, count, report, or show. So it comes to pass when we are classing actions, duties, or occasions, that we call a certain class great and another small, when really the latter are many fold more important and influential than the former. We are generally ignorant of the real moment of events which we think we understand.

2. It is to be observed that, even as the world judges, small things constitute almost the whole of life.

3. It very much exalts, as well as sanctions this view, that God is so observant of small things. He upholds the sparrows wing, clothes the lily with His own beautifying hand, and numbers the hairs of His children. He holds the balancings of the clouds. He maketh small the drops of rain.

4. It is a fact of history and of observation that all efficient men, while they have been men of comprehension, have also been men of detail. Napoleon was the most effective man in modern times--some will say, of all times. The secret of his character was, that while his plans were more vast, more various, and, of course, more difficult than those of other men, he had the talent, at the same time, to fill them up with perfect promptness and precision, in every particular of execution. There must be detail in every great work.

5. It is to be observed that there is more real piety in adorning one small than one great occasion. This may seem paradoxical, but what I intend will be seen by one or two illustrations. I have spoken of the minuteness of Gods works. When I regard the eternal God as engaged in polishing an atom, or elaborating the functions of a mote invisible to the eye, what evidence do I there receive of His desire to perfect His works! No gross and mighty world, however plausibly shaped, would yield a hundredth part the intensity of evidence. An illustration from human things will present a closer parallel. It is perfectly well understood, or if not, it should be, that almost any husband would leap into the sea, or rush into the burning edifice to rescue a perishing wife. But to anticipate the convenience or happiness of a wife in some small matter, the neglect of which would be unobserved, is a more eloquent proof of tenderness.

6. The importance of living to God in ordinary and small things, is seen in the fact that character, which is the end of religion, is in its very nature a growth.

Application:

1. Private Christians are here instructed in the true method of Christian progress and usefulness.

2. Our subject enables us to offer some useful suggestions, concerning the manner in which Churches may be made to prosper.

3. Finally, some useful hints are suggested to the ministers of Christ. (H. Bushnell, D. D.)

The value of little things

Who has despised the day of small things? Not the sagacious men of the world, to whom experience has taught the necessity of husbanding the minutes that make up days, and the pence that grow to pounds.

I. OUR LIVES FOR THE MOST PART ARE MADE UP OF LITTLE THINGS, AND BY THESE OUR PRINCIPLE IS TO BE TESTED. There are very few who have to take a prominent place in the great conflicts of their age, and to play their part in the arena of public life, The vast majority must dwell in humbler scenes, and be content to do a much meaner work. The conflicts which a Christian has to maintain, either against the evil in his own soul, or in the narrow circle where alone his influence is felt, appear to be very trivial and unimportant, yet are they to him the battle of life and for life, and true heroism is to he shown here as well as in those stander struggles in which some may win the leaders fame, or even the martyrs crown. It will stimulate us to faithfulness in such little things if we bear in mind the way in which the Master regards the humblest works that are done, and the poorest sacrifices that are made from a pure feeling of love to Him. He can recognize and bless the martyr-spirit even though it be shown in other ways than the endurance of bonds, or the suffering of death. There is not a tear of sympathy with the sorrows of others which we shed that falls without His knowledge. His presence is with us to encourage and strengthen us in these little as in the greater trials, and faithfulness here will have its own reward.

II. LITTLE DEFECTS WEAKEN THE INFLUENCE OF MANY VIRTUES. One sinner (the wise man tells us) destroyeth much good, and then following out the principle he proceeds to show by an expressive illustration how a little sin or even folly m a good man may rob him of much of the power that otherwise he would possess for good. Dead flies cause the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour, so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisdom and honour. The world is always on the watch for the faults of Christians. But the point on which we wish chiefly to insist is that mens estimate of our character is regulated chiefly by their observation of little things.

III. LITTLE THINGS CONTRIBUTE MATERIALLY TO THE FORMATION OF CHARACTER. Under the operation of varied causes, of whose power over us we are hardly-conscious, we are continually growing in holiness or sinking lower and lower in sin, by a process so gradual as to be scarcely perceptible. Conversion may be sudden, but not sanctification. Our power of resistance is to grow by constant exercise; our love, fed by the ministry of Providence and grace, is to burn with an ever brighter and purer flame; our path is to be like the shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day. Thus, by listening to every voice of instruction, by using every opportunity, by watchfulness in the least things, are we to attain spiritual increase. There is a part of our Lancashire coast on which the sea is making steady encroachments. Those who have long been familiar with its scenery can point you to places over which the tide now rolls its waters, where a few short years ago they wandered along the grassy cliff, and stood to watch the play of the wild waves beneath. From year to year the observer may note continued alteration--fresh portions of the cliff swept away, and the bed of the ocean becoming ever wider. Were he to ask for an account of these changes, some would tell him that during a terrible tempest the sea had rolled in with more than its usual violence and carried away great fragments of solid earth--and fancy that thus they had told the whole story. His own eyes, however, gave him fuller information. He sees around him preparations for the desolations of the coming winter. Other places are now menaced with the fate of their predecessors, and the work is already being done--the process may be gradual, but sure--every tide of more than ordinary power is contributing something towards it--by little and little the work advances, and all is making ready for the fiercer storm which shall put the final stroke to what may seem to be the work of a night, but is in reality that of weeks and months. This is a picture but too true of incidents in the spiritual life of man. Sometimes the successive steps of the process are all hidden, and we see only the sad result; in others its advances may be more distinctly marked. (J. G. Guinness, B. A.)

Gradual attainment of holiness

Holiness of character is not a thing into which we can jump in a moment, and just when we please. It is not like a mushroom, the growth of an hour. It cannot be attained without great watchfulness, earnest effort, much prayer, and a very close walk with Jesus. Like the coral reef which grows by little daily additions until it is strong enough to resist the mighty waves of the ocean, so is a holy character made up of what may be called littles, though in truth each of those littles is of vast importance. Little duties prayerfully discharged; little temptations earnestly resisted in the strength which God supplies out of the fulness which He has made to dwell in Jesus Christ for His people; little sins avoided, or crucified; these all together help to form that holy character which, in the hour of need, will be, under God, such a sure defence to the Christian. (A. C. Price, B. A.)

Fidelity in little things

In every thought, word, and act of an intelligent agent, there is a moral principle involved.

1. Fidelity in little things commends itself to us, when we consider our inability to estimate the prospective value, power, and influence of the smallest things.

2. Fidelity in little things commends itself when we consider that it is only by attention to small things that we can hope to be faithful in great. Great events often turn on little hinges. Chemists say, one grain of iodine will impart its colour to seven thousand times its weight in water. So, often, a little deed containing a great moral principle will impart its nature to many hearts and lives.

3. Attention to small things is important, as it relates to our individual character. Its effect is subjective as well as objective. A beautiful character reaches its climax by progressive development. You cannot paint it on the life. It must be inwrought.

4. The example given us by Christ, our great prototype, should prompt us to fidelity in little things.

5. We should exercise the strictest fidelity in all things, small and great, because we are to be judged in view of these things. (J. W. Bledsoe.)

On religious principle

Consider the excellence of religious principle

1. In the energy of its operation.

(1) Promptness in decision.

(2) Determination to do ones duty.

(3) Courage.

(4) Self-denial.

2. In the uniformity of its effects.

3. In the extent of its influence. It prompts to the discharge of every duty, and to the avoidance of every sin.

4. The simplicity of its character.

5. The perpetuity of its existence. Undecaying and immortal. (Essex Remembrancer.)

Faithful in little, faithful in much

Now let us look, for a moment or two, at these three principles.

I. From the highest point of view, TRUE FAITHFULNESS KNOWS NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN GREAT AND SMALL DUTIES. From the highest point of view--that is, from Gods point of view--to Him, nothing is great, nothing small, as we measure it. The worth and the quality of an action depends on its motive only, and not at all on its prominence, or on any other of the accidents which we are always apt to adopt as the tests of the greatness of our deeds. The largeness of the consequences of anything that we do is no measure of the true greatness or true value of it. So it is in regard to God Himself, and His doings. What can be little to the making of which there goes the force of a soul that can know God, and must abide for evermore? Nothing is small that a spirit can do. Nothing is small that can be done from a mighty motive. Faithfulness measures acts as God measures them. Large or small are not words for the vocabulary of conscience. It knows only two words--right and wrong. The circle that is in a gnats eye is as true a circle as the one that holds within its sweep all the stars; and the sphere that a dew-drop makes is as perfect a sphere as that of the world. All duties are the same which are done from the same motive; all acts which are not so done are alike sins. Faithfulness is one in every region. Large or small is of no account to the Sovereign eye. He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a prophets reward, because though not gifted with the prophets tongue, he has the prophets spirit, and does his small act of hospitality from the very same prophet-impulse which in another, who is more loftily endowed, leads to burning words and mighty deeds. Faithfulness is faith fulness, on whatsoever scale it be set forth!

II. Then--in another point of view, FAITHFULNESS IN SMALL DUTIES IS EVEN GREATER THAN FAITHFULNESS IN GREAT. Great things that are great because they seem to have very wide-reaching consequences, and seem to be lifted up upon a pinnacle of splendour; or great things that are great because there was severe resistance that had to be overcome before we did them, and sore temptations that were dragging us down on our way to the performance of them--are really great and lofty. Only, the little duties that had no mighty consequences, no glittering splendour about them, and the little duties that had not much strife with temptation before they were done, may be as great, as great in Gods eye, as great perhaps in their consequences, as great in their rewards, as in the other. Ah, my brother, it is a far harder thing, and it is a far higher proof of a thorough-going persistent Christian principle woven into the very texture of my soul, to go on plodding and patient, never taken by surprise by any small temptation, than to gather into myself the strength which God has given me, and, expecting some great storm to come down upon me, to stand fast and let it rage. It is a great deal easier to die once for Christ than to live always for Him. It is a great deal easier to do some single mighty act of self-surrender, than daily--unnoticed, patiently--to crucify the flesh with its affections and lusts. Let us neither repine at our narrow spheres, nor fancy that we can afford to live carelessly in them because they are narrow. The smallest duties are often harder--because of their apparent insignificance, because of their constant recurrence--harder than the great ones. But do not let us forget that if harder, they are on the whole more needful. The world has more need of a great number of Christian people doing little things like Christians, than it has need of one apostle preaching like an apostle, or one martyr dying like a martyr. The mass of trifles makes magnitude. The little things are greater than the great, because of their number. They are more efficacious than the single lofty acts. Like the air which in the lungs needs to be broken up into small particles, and diffused ere it parts with its vitalizing principle to the blood, so the minute acts of obedience, and the exhibition of the power of the gospel in the thousand trifles of Christian lives, permeating everywhere, will vitalize the world and will preach the gospel in such a fashion as never can be done by any single and occasional, though it may seem to be more lofty and more worthy, agency. Honour the trifles, and you will find yourself right about the great things! Lastly: FAITHFULNESS IN THAT WHICH IS LEAST IS THE PREPARATION FOR, AND SECURES OUR HAVING A WIDER SPHERE IN WHICH TO OBEY GOD. Of course, it is quite easy to see how, if once we are doing, what I have already said is the harder task--habitually doing the little things wisely and well, for the love of Christ and in the fear of God--we shall be fitted for the sorest sudden temptations, and shall be made able to perform far larger and far more apparently splendid acts. Every power strengthens by exercise. Every act of obedience smoothes the road for all that shall come after. And, on the other side, the same process exactly goes on to make men, by slow degrees, unfaithful in all. Tampering with a trifle; saying, Oh, it is a small matter, and I can venture it; or, It is a little thing, too little for mighty motives to be brought to bear upon it--that ends in this--unjust also in much. My brother, life is all great. Life is great because it is the aggregation of littles. As the chalk cliffs in the South, that rear themselves hundreds of feet above the crawling sea beneath, are all made up of the minute skeletons of microscopic animalculae; so life, mighty and awful as having eternal consequences, life that towers beetling over the sea of eternity, is made up of these minute incidents, of these trifling duties, of these small tasks; and if thou art not faithful in that which is least, thou art unfaithful in the whole. He only is faithful that is full of faith. (A. Maclaren, D. D.)

Guilt not to be estimated by gain

I. The great principle of the text is, that he who has sinned, though to a small amount in respect of the fruit of his transgression--provided he has done so by passing over a forbidden limit which was distinctly known to him, has, in the act of doing so, incurred a full condemnation in respect of the principle of his transgression. In one word, that the gain of it may be small, while the guilt of it may be great; that the latter ought not to be measured by the former; but that he who is unfaithful in the least shall be dealt with, in respect of the offence he has given to God, in the same way as if he had been unfaithful in much.

1. The first reason which we would assign in vindication of this is, that, by a small act of injustice, the line which separates the right from the wrong is just as effectually broken over as by a great act of injustice. There is no shading off at the margin of guilt, but a clear and vigorous delineation. It is not by a gentle transition that a man steps over from honesty to dishonesty. There is between them a wall rising up unto heaven; and the high authority of heaven must be stormed ere one inch of entrance can be made into the region of iniquity. The morality of the Saviour never leads him to gloss over beginnings of crime.

2. The second reason why he who is unfaithful in the least has incurred the condemnation of him who is unfaithful in much, is, that the littleness of the gain, so far from giving a littleness to the guilt, is in fact a circumstance of aggravation. There is just this difference. He who has committed injustice for the sake of a less advantage has done it on the impulse of a less temptation. Nay, by the second reason, this may serve to aggravate the wrath of the Divinity against him. It proves how small the price is which he sets upon his eternity, and how cheaply he can bargain the favour of God away from him, and how low he rates the good of an inheritance with Him, and for what a trifle he can dispose of all interest in His kingdom and in His promises. It is at the precise limit between the right and the wrong that the flaming sword of Gods law is placed. It is there that Thus saith the Lord presents itself, in legible characters, to our view. It is there where the operation of His commandment begins; and not at any of those higher gradations where a mans dishonesty first appals himself by the chance of its detection, or appals others by the mischief and insecurity which it brings upon social life.

II. Let us now attempt TO UNFOLD A FEW OF THE PRACTICAL CONSEQUENCES THAT MAY BE DRAWN FROM THE PRINCIPLE OF THE TEXT, both in respect to our general relation with God, and in respect to the particular lesson of faithfulness which may be deduced from it.

1. There cannot be a stronger possible illustration of our argument than the very first act of retribution that occurred in the history of our species. What is it that invests the eating of a solitary apple with a grandeur so momentous? How came an action, in itself so minute, to be the germ of such mighty consequences? We may not be able to answer all these questions; but we may at least learn what a thing of danger it is, under the government of a holy and inflexible God, to tamper with the limits of obedience.

2. Let us, therefore, urge the spirit and the practice of this lesson upon your observation. It is evangelizing human life by impregnating its minutest transactions with the spirit of the gospel. It is strengthening the wall of partition between sin and obedience. It is the teacher of righteousness taking his stand at the outpost of that territory which he is appointed to defend, and warning his hearers of the danger that lies in a single footstep of encroachment. It is letting them know that it is in the act of stepping over the limit that the sinner throws the gauntlet of his defiance against the authority of God. It may appear a very little thing, when you are told to be honest in little matters; when the servant is told to keep her hand from every one article about which there is not an express or understood allowance on the part of her superiors; when the dealer is told to lop off the excesses of that minuter fraudulency which is so currently practised in the humble walks of merchandise; when the workman is told to abstain from those petty reservations of the material of his work for which he is said to have such snug and ample opportunity; and when, without pronouncing on the actual extent of these transgressions, all are told to be faithful in that which is least, else, if there be truth in our text, they incur the guilt of being unfaithful in much. It may be thought, that because such dishonesties as these are scarcely noticeable, they are therefore not worthy of notice. But it is just in the proportion of their being unnoticeable by the human eye, that it is religious to refrain from them. These are the cases in which it will be seen, whether the control of the omniscience of God makes up for the control of human observation--in which the sentiment, that Thou God seest me! should carry a preponderance through all the secret places of a mans history--in which, when every earthly check of an earthly morality is withdrawn, it should be felt that the eye of God is upon him, and that the judgment of God is in reserve for him. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)

Faithfulness in little things

In our text the Master declares that fidelity, which is an element of conscience, must be thorough. It must not be an optional thing, chosen when we see that it will be better than any other instrument to secure a desired end. It must belong to every part of life, pervading it. It must belong to the least things as much as to the highest. It is not a declaration that little things are as important aa great things. It is not a declaration that the conscience is to regard all duties as of one magnitude and of one importance. It is a declaration that the habit of violating conscience, even in the least things, produces mischief that at last invalidate it for the greatest, and that is a truth that scarcely can have contradiction. I propose to illustrate this truth in some of its relations to life. In the first place, I shall speak of the heedlessness and unconscientiousness with which men take up opinions and form judgments, on every side and of every kind, in daily life. In regard to events, men seldom make it a matter of conscience to see things as they are, and hear things as they really report themselves. They follow their curiosity, their sense of wonder, their temper, their interests, or their prejudices, instead of their judgment and their conscience. There are few men who make it a point to know just what things do happen of which they are called to speak, and just how they happen. How many men were there round the corner? Twenty, says the man, quickly. There were seven. How long did you have to wait? Two hours, at least. It was just three-quarters of an hour by the watch. So, in a thousand things that happen every day, one man repeats what his imagination reported to him, and another man what his impatient, irritable feelings said to him. There are very few men that make it a matter of deliberate conscience to see things as they are, and report them as they happen. This becomes a great hindrance to business, clogs it, keeps men under the necessity of revising their false impressions; expends time and work; puts men on false tracks and in wrong directions; multiplies the burdens of life. But its worse effect is seen in the judgments and prejudices which men are liable to entertain about their fellow-men, and the false sentences which they are accustomed to issue, either by word of mouth or by thoughts and feelings. In thousands of men, the mind, if unveiled, would be found to be a Star-chamber filled with false witnesses and cruel judgments. The effect in each case may be small, but if you consider the sum-totals of a mans life, and the grand amount of the endless scenes of false impressions, of wicked judgments, of causeless prejudices, they will be found to be enormous. This, however, is the least evil. It is the entire untrustworthiness of a moral sense which has been so dealt with that is most to be deplored. The conscience ought to be like a perfect mirror. It ought to reflect exactly the image, that falls upon it. A mans judgment that is kept clear by commerce with conscience ought to reveal things as they are, facts as they exist, and conduct as it occurs. Now it is not necessary to break a mirror to pieces in order to make it worthless. Let one go behind it with a pencil, or with a needle of the finest point, and, with delicate touch, make the smallest line through the silver coating of the back; the next day let him make another line at right angles to that; and the third day let him make still another line parallel to the first one; and the next day let him make another line parallel to the second, and so continue to do day by day, and one year shall not have passed away before that mirror will be so scratched that it will be good for nothing. It is not necessary to deal it a hard blow to destroy its power; these delicate touches will do it, little by little. It is not necessary to be a murderer or a burglar in order to destroy the moral sense; but ah! these million little infelicities, as they are called, these scratchings and raspings, take the silver off from the back of the conscience--take the tone and temper out of the moral sense. Nay, we do not need even such mechanical force as this; just let the apartment be uncleansed in which the mirror stands: let particles of dust, and the little flocculent parts of smoke, settle film by film, flake by flake, speck by speck, upon the surface of the mirror, and its function is destroyed, so that it will reflect neither the image of yourself nor of anything else. Its function is as much destroyed as if it were dashed to pieces. Not even is this needed; only let one come so near to it that his warm breath falling on its cold face is condensed to vapour, and then it can make no report. Now there are comparatively few men who destroy their moral sense by a dash and a blow, but there is many a man whose conscience is seared as with a hot iron. The effect of this is not merely to teach us the moral lesson that man is fallible; it is to diminish the trust of man in man. And what is the effect of diminishing that? It is to introduce an element which dissevers society, which drives men away from one another, and takes away our strength. Faith in man, trust in man, is the great law of cohesion in human society. And so this infidelity in little things and little duties works both inwardly as well as outwardly. It deteriorates the moral sense; it makes men unreliable; it makes man stand in doubt of man; it loosens the ties that bind society together, and make it strong; it is the very counteracting agent of that divine love which was meant to bring men together in power. The same truth, yet more apparently, and with more melancholy results, is seen in the un-trustworthiness and infidelity of men in matters of honesty and dishonesty. The man that steals one penny is--just as great a transgressor as if he stole a thousand dollars? No, not that. The man that steals one single penny is--as great a transgressor against the laws of society as if he stole a thousand dollars? No, not exactly that. The man that steals one penny is--just as great a transgressor against the commercial interests of men as if he stole a thousand dollars? No, not that. The man that steals a penny is just as great a transgressor against the purity of his own conscience as if he stole a million of dollars. The danger of these little things is veiled under a false impression. You will hear a man say of his boy, Though he may tell a little lie, he would not tell a big one; though he may practise a little deceit, he would not practise a big one; though he may commit a little dishonesty, he would not commit a big one. But these little things are the ones that destroy the honour, and the moral sense, and throw down the fence, and let a whole herd of buffaloes of temptation drive right through you. Criminals that die on the gallows; miserable creatures that end their days in poorhouses; wretched beings that hide themselves in loathsome places in cities; men that are driven as exiles across the sea and over the world--these are the ends of little things, the beginnings of which were thought to be safe. It is these little things that constitute your peculiar temptation and your worst danger. (H. W.Beecher.)

Little things tests of character

Can you discover a mans character more accurately by his public, extraordinary acts, than by his ordinary, everyday conduct and spirit? Which is the true Marlborough--the general in the field winning brilliant victories, or the peculator in his chamber manipulating papers for defrauding the public treasury? Which is the real man--Lord Bacon on the bench, or Lord Bacon with open palm behind his back feeling for bribes? Which is the true woman--the lady in the parlour courteously receiving her guests, or the termagant rendering home wretched by everyday exactions and scoldings? Jesus teaches that the little things of everyday life reveal true character, and show the man as he is in himself, by referring to the ordinary tempers by which he is governed. Is it not plain, when simply announced, that general conduct in little things is a truer test of a mans real character than occasional isolated acts could be?

1. Little things make up the vast universe. The clouds gather up the rains in moisture, and part with them in drops. The stars do not leap fitfully along their orbits, but measure with equal movement each consecutive mile. All the analogies of nature point to the minute as essential to the harmony, glory, and utility of the whole. And little things are as necessary in their places in the moral, as in the physical world.

2. Jehovah is observant of little things. Sparrows. Lilies. Jehovah neglects nothing. Nothing is so little as to be beneath His notice. His providence regards with equal distinctness a worm and a world, a unit and a universe. You are unlike your God and Saviour if you neglect little things.

3. Little things engross the most of life. Great events are only occasional. Frequency and regularity would take away from their greatness, by rendering them common. We shall find little to do, if we save our energies for great occasions. If we preserve our piety for prominent services, we shall seldom find place for its exercise. Piety is not something for show, but something for use; not the gay steed in the curricle, but the plough-horse in the furrow; not jewellery for adornment, but calico for home wear and apron for the kitchen.

4. Attention to little things is essential to efficiency and success in accomplishing great things. Letters are little things, but he who scouts the alphabet will never read Davids psalms. The mechanic must know how to sharpen his plane, if he would make a moulding; the artist must mix colours, if he would paint landscapes. In every direction the great is reached through the little. He will never rise to great services who will not pass through the little, and train his spiritual nature, and educate his spiritual capabilities. Through faithfulness in the least he rises to faithfulness in the much, and not otherwise.

5. Little things are causes of great events, springs of large influences. To know whether a thing is really small or great, you must trace its results. Xerxes led millions to the borders of Greece. It looked to the world like a big thing. The whole vast array accomplished nothing. It turned out a very small business. The turning of a tiny nee.lie steadily toward a fixed point is a little common thing, but it guides navies along safe and sure paths, over unmarked oceans. So a magnetic word has guided a soul through a stormy world to a peaceful haven. A simple, secret prayer has pierced and opened clouds to pout down showers of spiritual blessings upon a city or state.

6. Conscientiousness in little things is the best evidence of sincere piety.

7. Faithfulness in little things is essential to true piety. The principle of obedience is simply doing what the Lord requires because He requires it. There is nothing little if God requires it. The veriest trifle becomes a great thing if the alternative of obedience or rebellion is involved in it. Microscopic holiness is the perfection of excellence. To live by the day, and to watch each step, is the true pilgrimage method. (J. L. Burrows, D. D.)

Trial of fidelity

Here are two great truths suggested to us.

1. That we are here in this world merely on trial, and serving our apprenticeship.

2. That it is our fidelity that is tried, not so much whether we have done great or little things, but whether we have shown the spirit which above all else a steward should show--fidelity to the interests entrusted to him. The two verses following, in which this is applied, may best be illustrated by familiar figures. If, says our Lord, ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust that which is real? He considers us all in this world as children busy with mere playthings and toys, though so profoundly in earnest. But, looking at children so engaged, you can perfectly see the character of each. Although the actual things they are doing are of no moment or reality; although, with a frankness and penetration not given to their elders, they know they are but playing, yet each is exhibiting the very qualities which will afterwards make or mar him, the selfish greed and fraud of one child being as patent as the guileless open-handedness of the other. To the watchful parents these games that are forgotten in the nights sleep, these buildings which as soon as complete are swept away to make room for others, are as thorough a revelation of the character of the child as affairs of state and complicated transactions are of the grown man. And if the parent sees a grasping selfishness in his child, or a domineering inconsiderateness of every one but himself, as he plays at buying and selling, building and visiting, he knows that these same qualities will come out in the real work of life, and will unfit their possessor for the best work, and prevent him from honourable and generous conduct, and all the highest functions and duties of life. So our Lord, observant of the dispositions we are showing as we deal with the shadowy objects and passing events of this seeming substantial world, marks us off as fit or unfit to be entrusted with what is real and abiding. If this man shows such greed for the gold he knows he must in a few years leave, will he not show a keener, intenser selfishness in regard to what is abiding? If he can trample on other peoples rights for the sake of a pound or two, how can he be trusted to deal with what is infinitely more valuable? If here in a world where mistakes are not final, and which is destined to he burned up with all the traces of evil that are in it--if in a world which, after all, is a mere card-house, or in which we are apprentices learning the use of our tools, and busy with work which, if we spoil, we do no irreparable harm--if here we display incorrigible negligence and incapacity to keep a high aim and a good model before us, who would be so foolish as to let us loose among eternal matters, things of abiding importance, and in which mistake and carelessness and infidelity are irreparable? (Marcus Dods, D. D.)

We are being watched

A merchant sees among his clerks one whose look and bearing are prepossessing, and he thinks that by and by this lad might possibly make a good partner; he watches him, but he finds him gradually degenerating into slipshod ways of doing his work, coming down late in the mornings, and showing no zeal for the growth of the business; and so the thought grows in his mind, If he is not faithful in that which is another mans, how can I give him the business as his own? I cant hand over my business to one who will squander what I have spent my life in accumulating; to one who has not sufficient liking for work to give himself heartily to it, or sufficient sense of honour to do it heartily whether he likes it or no. Much as I should like to lift him out of a subordinate situation, I cannot do so. Thus are determined the commercial and social prospects of many an unconscious youth, and thus are determined the eternal prospects of many a heedless servant of God, who little thinks that the Masters eye is upon him, and that by hasting to be rich he is making himself eternally poor, and by slackness in Gods service is ruining his own future. (Marcus Dods, D. D.)

Influence of little things

A jest led to a war between two great nations. The presence of a comma in a deed lost to the owner of an estate one thousand pounds a month for eight months. The battle of Corunna, in 1809, is said to have been fought, and the life of that noble officer Sir John Moore sacrificed, through a dragoon stopping to drink while bearing despatches. A man lighting a fire on the sea-shore led to the Rev. John Newtons honoured labours and life of usefulness.

Little kindnesses

We sin by omitting cheap acts of beneficence in our daily walk and among our early companionship. The web of a merciful life is made up of these slender threads. (J. W. Alexander, D. D.)

Little sins

A man who was hung at Carlisle for house-breaking declared that his first step to ruin was taking a halfpenny out of his mothers pocket while she was asleep. Another offender, convicted of housebreaking at Chester, said at the gallows, You are come to see a man die. Oh! take warning by me. The first beginning of my ruin was Sabbath-breaking. It led me into bad company, and from bad company to robbing orchards and gardens, and then to housebreaking, and that has brought me to this place.

Faithfulness shown in restitution of wrongful gains

A brother in the ministry took occasion to preach on the passage, He that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. The theme was, that men who take advantage of others in small things have the very element of character to wrong the community and individuals in great things, where the prospect of escaping detection or censure is as little to be dreaded. The preacher exposed the various ways by which people wrong others; such as borrowing, by mistakes in making change, by errors in accounts, by escaping taxes and custom-house duties, by managing to escape postage, by finding articles and never seeking owners, and by injuring articles borrowed, and never making the fact known to the owner when returned. One lady the next day met her pastor, and said, I have been to rectify an error made in giving me change a few weeks ago, for I felt bitterly your reproof yesterday. Another individual went to Boston to pay for an article not in her bill, which she noticed was not charged when she paid it. A man going home from meeting said to his companion, I do not believe there was a man in the meeting-house to-day who did not feel condemned.

After applying the sermon to a score or more of his acquaintances, he continued, Did not the pastor utter something about finding a pair of wheels? I believe not, neighbour.. He spoke of keeping little things which had been found. Well, I thought he said something about finding a pair of wheels, and supposed he meant me. I found a pair down in my lot a while ago. Do you, said his companion, know who they belong to? Mr. B.

-- lost them a short time ago. The owner was soon in the possession of his wheels. (Vermont Chronicle.)

Unfaithfulness in little

A king appointed one servant over his gold treasure, another over his straw. The latters honesty being suspected, he was angry because the gold had not been trusted to him. The king said, Thou fool, if thou couldst not be trusted with straw, how can any one trust thee with gold? (Archbishop Trench.)

Momentary unfaithfulness to be avoided

A Corsican gentleman, who had been taken prisoner by the Genoese, was thrown into a dark dungeon, where he was chained to the ground. While he was in this dismal situation the Genoese sent a message to him, that if he would accept of a commission in their service, he might have it. No, said he; were I to accept your offer, it would be with a determined purpose to take the first opportunity of returning to the service of my country. But I would not have my countrymen even suspect that I could be one moment unfaithful.

Ye cannot serve God and mammon

The crime of avarice

I. REASONS WHY AVARICE SHOULD BE GUARDED AGAINST.

1. The avaricious man usually leads a miserable life, making no use of his wealth.

2. Avarice takes away a mans peace of mind.

(1) The avaricious man is in constant disquietude--

(a) Through terror of losing his possessions.

(b) Through envy of others, and the craving to possess their property.

(c) Through desire to accumulate more wealth.

(2) The avaricious man is inconsolable at the loss of his riches.

2. Avarice is a base vice, and the source of many other vices.

3. Avarice almost inevitably leads to eternal ruin.

II. MEANS TO BE ADOPTED FOR GUARDING AGAINST AVARICE.

1. Endeavour to know yourself, your inclinations, passions, desires; and examine yourself in order to ascertain whether you cannot find some symptom of avarice within yourself. Such symptoms are--

(1) A greater confidence in temporal goods than in Almighty God (Psa_52:7).

(2) Unscrupulousness in the manner of acquiring temporal goods.

(3) Excessive grief at the loss of temporal goods.

(4) If you do not use temporal goods for the glory of God, nor for your own and your neighbours needs.

2. Strive to keep from your soul the vice of avarice,

(1) By continual struggle against the concupiscence of money and riches Psa_62:10).

(2) By the exercise of opposite virtues, especially that of Christian charity. You will experience the joys earned by these virtues.

(3) By supplication for the removal of the temptation. (Chevassu.)

The two masters

No man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one and love the other: or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon (Mat_6:24). In one point of view, this sounds very strangely; for nothing is more certain than that we can serve two masters. Every child that is dutifully reared serves two masters--its father and its mother; and it is quite possible for one to be a servant of a whole family of masters. But in order that this may take place, it is indispensably necessary that the masters should be alike in feeling, and identical in interest. But if masters are antagonistic the one to the other, if their interests are not only different but conflicting, if to serve one of necessity puts you in opposition to the other, then it is impossible to serve two. And the more you look at it the plainer it becomes. Suppose one man represents perfect honour, and another represents perfect meanness, and you undertake to serve both of them, what sort of success will you have? Suppose one man be called Truth, and another be called Falsehood, and you attempt to serve both of them, is it not plain that you will either hate the one and love the other, or else hold to the one and despise the other? You cannot serve both at the same time. No man can serve purity and lust at the same time. No man can serve good nature and anger at the same time. Are God and mammon, then, antagonistic? And what are the ways in which man is looked at from the two spheres--the Divine and the earthly? Mammon regards man as a creature of time and this world, and thinks of him, plans for him, educates him, and uses him, am it, like the beast of the field, he only had existence here, and as if his existence was only related to the comforts that belong to this state of being. But God looks upon man as a creature of eternal duration, passing through this world. The chief end and interest of men are also viewed antagonistically. In short, man in his immediate and visible good, is that which mammon regards. On the other hand, God regards not indifferently the interests of our body; but more He regards the interests of our being. Mammon builds men in the finer traits which they possess in common with animals. God would build men in those traits which they have in common with Him. One builds for this world exclusively. The other builds for this world and the next. There is nothing more certain than that a mans character depends upon his ruling purpose. Let us look at it. A man may be a thoroughly worldly man--that is, all his ruling aims, and desires, and expectations, may make him worldly; and yet he may be observant of external religious services. A man is not to be supposed to be less a worldly man because when the Sabbath day comes round he knows it. He maybe, also, a believer in the gospel, and in the most evangelical and orthodox type of doctrine--as an idea. It is quite possible for a man to be supremely worldly, and yet to have strong religious feelings. There is nothing more common than instances which go to show that we like as a sentiment things that we do not like as an ethical rule. Nay, it is possible for a man to go further, and yet be a thoroughly worldly man. And here it is that the distinction comes in. Although a man may be a servant of mammon, and may serve him with heart and soul; yet, externally, there may be a great many appearances that look as though he was serving God. And men really seem to think that they can serve God and mammon [

1. There is reason m believe that the morality of multitudes of men, though they are good in some degree, leaves out that which alone can make it a ground of complacence and trust. A man may be a moral man, and leave out the whole of the life to come. The Greeks were moral men, many of them. The Romans were moral men, many of them.

2. There is reason to fear that the religion of multitudes of professors of religion is but a form of church-morality. You may tell me that this is a misjudgment. I hope it is. But what sort of lives are we living, when it is possible to misinterpret them? What if I should have occasion to say the same things about your allegiance to the government that I have said about your religion? There is not a man of any note in the community about whose allegiance you have any doubt. If I point to one man, you say, He is not true to his country. If I point to another man, you say, He is loyal; and you state facts to prove it. You say, When his personal interest came in collision with the interest of the country, and one or the other had to be given up, he gave up his personal interest. But when Gods claims come in collision with your personal interests, Gods claims go down, and your personal interests go up. Now, there ought to be no cause for doubt that you are Christians. A man is bound to live towards his country so that there shall be no mistake about his patriotism. And God says, You are bound to live towards Me so that in some way men shall see that you are My children. You are bound to live in everything as you do in some things. You are attempting, partly through ignorance, partly by reason of carelessness, and partly on account of too low an estimate of the sacredness of your religious obligations, to serve God with your right hand, and mammon with your left; and men see it, and they doubt you; and that is not the worst of it--they doubt God, they doubt Christ, they doubt the reality of religion. And to be the occasion of doubt concerning matters of such grave importance, is culpable. No man, therefore, has a right to allow any mistake to exist in the matter of his Chris tian character. There is need, Christian brethren, of severe tests in this particular. You need to settle these questions: Where is my allegiance? Am I with God, and for God supremely? (H. W. Beecher.)

The two contrary masters, or the inconsistency of the service of God and the world

For the opening and prosecuting of which words, consider--

1. What these two masters are.

2. What it is to serve them.

3. How none can serve them both.

4. Why none can serve them both.

5. The use and application.

For the first of these, these two masters are God and the world, but with much difference, as we may see severally. God is a Lord and Master absolutely, properly, and by good right in Himself; being in His own nature most holy, most mighty, most infinite in glory and sovereignty over all His creatures. Again, He is a Lord and Master in relation to us: and not only by right of creation and preservation as we are men and creatures, but also by right of redemption and sanctification, as new men and new creatures.

1. He hath made a covenant with us, first of works, and then of grace.

2. He hath appointed our work.

3. He hath as a Master appointed us liberal wages, even a merciful reward of eternal life.

Thus is God a Lord and Master. Now, on the other side, the world is called a master or lord, not by any right in itself, of over us, but--

1. By usurpation.

2. By mans corruption, and defection from the true God.

3. By the worlds general estimation, and acceptation of the wealth and mammon, as a lord and great commander; which appeareth--

(1) By subjecting themselves to the basest services of wealth for wealth.

(2) By affecting wealth as the chief good.

(3) By depending (as servants on their masters) on their wealth.

Concerning the service of these masters, we must mark, that our Saviour saith not, A man cannot serve God that hath riches, but, He cannot serve God and riches. For he that cannot distinguish between having the world, and serving the world, cannot understand this text and conclusion of Jesus Christ. Our Lord well knew it was lawful both to have, and to seek, and to use the world holily and humbly. But how may we conceive that one cannot be servant to two masters, or to these two? In these conditions:

1. Not at the same time.

2. Not in their proper commands; for as they are contrary lords, so they command contrary things, and draw to contrary courses. One calls to works of mercy, charity, compassion, liberality, and the like; the other to cruelty, and unmercifulness, to shut our eyes from beholding our own flesh, to shut our ear from the cry of the poor, to shut our purse and hand from the charitable relief of Christs poor members. And how can one man obey both these in their contrary commands?

3. No man can serve two masters in sovereignty, unless they be subordinate one to the other, and so their commands concur in order one to another, and cross not one another.

The reasons whereof are these:

1. A servant is the possession of his master; and one possession can have but one owner and possessor at once.

2. The servant of the world sets up his wealth as an idol in his heart; by which the worldling forsakes the true God, and turns to most gross idolatry. So of the second reason.

3. The apostle (Rom_6:16) asks thus, Know ye not, that to whomsoever ye give yourselves as servants to obey, his servants ye are whom ye do obey, whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But the distinction implies that they cannot obey both together.

4. No man can serve these two masters, because a man cannot divide his heart between God and the world; and if he could, God will have no part of a divided heart, as Elijah said in that case (1Ki_18:20).

How may I know what master I serve?

1. Whom hast thou covenanted withal? God or the world? To whom hast thou wholly resigned thyself? Is thy strength become Gods? Is thy time His? thy labour His?

2. Every servant is commanded by his master. Gods servant knows his Lords mind and pleasure, and readily attempts it, even in most difficult commandments.

3. Every servant receives wages of his own master, and thrives by his service. Of whom doest thou receive wages?

4. Which of these two masters lovest thou best? He that is thy master, thy affection must cleave to him, as is said of the prodigal.

5. If thou beest the servant of God, thy wealth is His servant as well as thyself. (T. Taylor, D. D.)

Oneness of service

What we all want is unity of character. We are, most of us, too many characters folded up into one. This want of unity of character is the chief secret of almost all our weakness. No life can be a strong life which has not a fixed focus. Another consequence of this uncertainty of aim and this divided allegiance is that we really are missing the goodness and happiness of everything. We have too much religion thoroughly to enjoy the world, and too much of the world thoroughly to enjoy religion. Our convictions haunt us in the world, and our worldliness follows us even to our knees. But there is a worse consequence than this. The Holy Spirit is grieved in us, and Christ is wounded, and the Father is dishonoured. For, which is worse, to be half loved or not to be loved at all? Where you have a right to all, is not partial love a mockery and an insult? The question, the all-important question is, What is the remedy? But first, before I speak of that, let me draw your attention to a distinction which is not without its force. The word masters in the text does not actually carry the meaning of masters and servants in the ordinary acceptation of the phrases. It might be literally translated, according to the root of the word, proprietors or lords. No one can serve two proprietors. This emphasizes the sentence. God has a property, all property, in you. By right you are His. The world is not your proprietor. You are not made to be the worlds But now I return to the question, How can we best attain to serve one lord? I should answer first, without hesitation, by making that one Master, or Proprietor, or Lord, the Lord Jesus Christ. And more than this. God has given the govern merit and the sovereignty of this world till the day of judgment, to Jesus Christ. Therefore He is our Proprietor and our Master. Therefore I say, begin with believing that you are forgiven. Let Jesus--as your own dear Saviour--occupy His right place in your heart. The rest is quite sure. You will want no other Masher. All life is service. The happiness or the unhappiness of the service depends on who is the master. If self is the master, the service will be a failure! If the world is the master, the service will soon become drudgery I If Christ is the master, the service will be liberty; the law will be love, and the wages life, life for ever. If self, and the world, and Christ, be all masters, the diluted service will be nothing worth. There will be no service at all. Self will go to the top, and self will be disappointed. But if the Master be one, and that one God, that concentration will give force to every good thing within you. Life will be a great success. The service will be sweet. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

Impossible to serve God and mammon

We cannot possibly serve both God and mammon. When you see a dog following two men, says Ralph Erskine, you know not to which of them he belongs while they walk together; but let them come to a parting-road, and one go one way, and the other another way, then will you know which is the dogs master. So while a man may have the world and a religious profession too, we cannot tell which is the mans master, God or the world; but stay till the man come to a parting-road. God calls him this way, and the world calls him that way. Well, if God be his master, he follows truth and righteousness, and lets the world go; but if the world be his master, then he follows the flesh and the lusts thereof, and lets God and conscience go. It is always so. The lukewarm can never be trusted, but the heartily-loving are ever loyal.

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 16:10-12. He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much — Here our Lord proceeds in the application of the parable. As if he had said, Whether ye have more or less, see that ye be faithful as well as wise stewards: for if you make that use of your riches which I have been recommending, you shall be received into those everlasting habitations, where all the friends of goodness dwell, because, by your fidelity in managing the smallest trust of temporal advantages committed to your care, you show that you are capable of the much greater trust of spiritual and heavenly employments and enjoyments, things of a much higher nature. And he that is unjust in the least — He that useth these lowest gifts unfaithfully; is unjust also in much — Is likewise unfaithful in spiritual things. In other words, If you do not use your riches, and power, and other temporal advantages, for the glory of God, and the good of your fellow- creatures, you shall be excluded from the abodes of the blessed, because, by behaving unfaithfully in the small trust committed to you now, you render yourselves both unworthy and incapable of a share in the everlasting inheritance. For if ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous — Or rather, as the word here signifies, the false, the deceitful mammon — That is, in the use of your riches, and other temporal blessings, very properly called the false mammon, because they always deceive those who confide in them as the sovereign good; who will commit to your trust the true riches? — Spiritual and eternal blessings, which alone are true riches. “The word riches is substituted by our translators instead of mammon, which was the word Christ intended, and which, for that reason, should find its place in the translation of this verse. Mammon, coming from the Hebrew אמן, signifies whatever one is apt to confide in; and because men put their trust generally in external advantages, such as riches, authority, honour, power, knowledge, the word mammon is used to denote every thing of that kind, and particularly riches, by way of eminence.” — Macknight. See note on Mat 6:24. And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s — The word man is not in the original, and is improperly supplied in the translation, for it is not man but God who is intended; to whom the riches, and other advantages in our possession, do properly belong; who has committed them to us only as stewards, to be laid out for the good of his family, and who may any moment call us to give an account of our management. Observe well, reader, none of these temporal things are ours; we are only stewards of them, not proprietors: God is the proprietor of all: he lodges them in our hands for a season, but still they are his property. “Rich men,” says a late writer, “understand and consider this! If your steward uses any part of your estate, (so called in the language of men,) any further, or any otherwise than you direct, he is a knave: he has neither conscience nor honour. Neither have you either the one or the other, if you use any part of that estate which is in truth God’s, not yours, any otherwise than he directs.” Who shall give you that which is your own — That which, when it is conferred upon you, shall be perpetually in your possession, shall be your own for ever. Our Lord’s meaning, therefore, is, “Since you have dared to be unfaithful in that which was only a trust committed to you by God for a short time, and of which you knew you were to give him an account, it is evident you are not fit to be intrusted by him with the riches of heaven; these being treasures which, if he bestowed them on you, would be so fully your own, that you should have them perpetually in your possession, and never be called to an account for your management of them.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luke

TWO KINDS OF RICHES

Luk 16:10 - Luk 16:12.

That is a very strange parable which precedes my text, in which our Lord takes a piece of crafty dishonesty on the part of a steward who had been embezzling his lord’s money as in some sense an example for us Christian people, There are other instances in which He does the same thing, finding a soul of goodness in things evil, as, for instance, in the parable of the Unjust Judge. Similar is the New Testament treatment of war or slavery, both of which diabolical things are taken as illustrations of what in the highest sphere are noble and heavenly things.

But having delivered the parable, our Lord seems, in the verses that I have read, to anticipate the objection that the unfaithfulness of the steward can never be an example for God’s stewards; and in the words before us, amongst other things, He says substantially this, that whilst the steward’s using his lord’s wealth in order to help his lord’s debtors was a piece of knavery and unfaithfulness, in us it is not unfaithfulness, but the very acme of faithfulness. In the text we have the thought that there are two kinds of valuable things in the world, a lower and a higher; that men may be very rich in regard to the one, and very poor in regard to the other. In respect to these, ‘There is that maketh himself rich, and yet hath nothing; there is that maketh himself poor, and yet hath great riches.’ More than that, the noblest use of the lower kind of possessions is to secure the possession of the highest. And so He teaches us the meaning of life, and of all that we have.

Now, there are three things in these words to which I would turn your attention-the two classes of treasure, the contrast of qualities between these two, and the noblest use of the lower.

I. The Two Classes of Treasure.

Now, we shall make a great mistake if we narrow down the interpretation of that word ‘mammon’ in the context {which is ‘that which is least,’ etc., here} to be merely money. It covers the whole ground of all possible external and material possessions, whatsoever things a man can only have in outward seeming, whatsoever things belong only to the region of sense and the present. All that is in the world, in fact, is included in the one name. And you must widen out your thoughts of what is referred to here in this prolonged contrast which our Lord runs between the two sets of treasures, so as to include, not only money, but all sorts of things that belong to this sensuous and temporal scene. And, on the other hand, there stands opposite to it, as included in, and meant by, that which is ‘most,’ ‘that which is the true riches,’ ‘that which is your own’; everything that holds of the unseen and spiritual, whether it be treasures of intellect and lofty thought, or whether it be pure and noble aims, or whether it be ideals of any kind, the ideals of art, the aspirations of science, the lofty aims of the scholar and the student-all these are included. And the very same standard of excellence which declares that the treasures of a cultivated intellect, of a pure mind, of a lofty purpose, are higher than the utmost of material good, and that ‘wisdom is better than rubies,’ the very same standard, when applied in another direction, declares that above the treasures of the intellect and the taste are to be ranked all the mystical and great blessings which are summoned up in that mighty word salvation. And we must take a step further, for neither the treasures of the intellect, the mind, and the heart, nor the treasures of the spiritual life which salvation implies, can be realised and reached unless a man possesses God. So in the deepest analysis, and in the truest understanding of these two contrasted classes of wealth you have but the old antithesis: the world-and God. He that has God is rich, however poor he may be in reference to the other category; and he that has Him not is poor, however rich he may be. ‘The lines are fallen to me in pleasant places,’ says the Psalmist; and ‘I have a goodly heritage,’ because he could also say, ‘God is the strength of my heart and my portion for ever.’ So there is the antithesis, the things of time and sense, the whole mass of them knit together on the one hand; the single God alone by Himself on the other. Of these two classes of valuable things our Lord goes on next to tell us the relative worth. For we have here II. The Contrast between the Two.

That contrast is threefold, as you observe, ‘that which is least.’ or, perhaps better, ‘that which is very little.’ and ‘that which is much.’ That is a contrast in reference to degree. But degree is a shallow word, which does not cover the whole ground, nor go down to the depths. So our Lord comes next to a contrast in regard to essential nature, ‘the unrighteous mammon’ and ‘the true riches.’ But even these contrasts in degree and in kind do not exhaust all the contrasts possible, for there is another, the contrast in reference to the reality of our possession: ‘that which is another’s’; ‘that which is your own.’ Let us, then, take these three things, the contrast in degree, the contrast in kind, the contrast in regard to real possession.

First, then, and briefly, mental and spiritual and inward blessings, salvation, God, are more than all externals. Our Lord gathers all the conceivable treasures of earth, jewels and gold and dignities, and scenes of sensuous delights, and everything that holds to the visible and the temporal, and piles them into one scale, and then He puts into the other the one name, God; and the pompous nothings fly up and are nought, and have no weight at all. Is that not true? Does it need any demonstration, any more talk about it? No!

But then comes in sense and appeals to us, and says, ‘You cannot get beyond my judgment. These things are good.’ Jesus Christ does not say that they are not, but sense regards them as far better than they are. They are near us, and a very small object near us, by the laws of perspective, shuts out a mightier one beyond us. We in Manchester live in a community which is largely based on, and actuated and motived in its diligence by the lie that material good is better than spiritual good, that it is better to be a rich man and a successful merchant than to be a poor and humble and honest student; that it is better to have a balance at your bankers than to have great and pure and virginal thoughts in a clean heart; that a man has done better for himself when he has made a fortune than when he has God in his heart. And so we need, and God knows it was never more needed in Manchester than to-day, that we should preach and preach and preach, over and over again, this old-fashioned threadbare truth, which is so threadbare and certain that it has lost its power over the lives of many of us, that all that, at its mightiest, is very little, and that this, at its least, is very much. Dear brethren, you and I know how hard it is always, especially how hard it is in business lives, to keep this as our practical working faith. We say we believe, and then we go away and live as if we believed the opposite. I beseech you listen to the scale laid down by Him who knew all things in their measure and degree, and let us settle it in our souls, and live as if we had settled it, that it is better to be wise and good than to be rich and prosperous, and that God is more than a universe of worlds, if we have Him for our own.

But to talk about a contrast in degree degrades the reality, for it is no matter of difference of measurement, but it is a matter of difference of kind. And so our Lord goes on to a deeper phase of the contrast, when He pits against one another ‘the unrighteous mammon’ and ‘the true riches.’ Now, there is some difficulty in that contrast. The two significant terms do not seem to be precise opposites, and possibly they are not intended to be logically accurate counterparts of each other. But what is meant by ‘the unrighteous mammon’? I do not suppose that the ordinary explanation of that verse is quite adequate. We usually suppose that by so stigmatising the material good, He means to suggest how hard it is to get it-and you all know that-and how hard it is to keep it, and how hard it is to administer it, without in some measure falling into the sin of unrighteousness. But whilst I dare say that may be the signification intended, if we were to require that the word here should be a full and correct antithesis to the other phrase, ‘the true riches,’ we should need to suppose that ‘unrighteous’ here meant that which falsely pretended to be what it was not. And so we come to the contrast between the deceitfulness of earthly good and the substantial reality of the heavenly. Will any fortune, even though it goes into seven figures, save a man from the miseries, the sorrows, the ills that flesh is heir to? Does a great estate make a man feel less desolate when he stands by his wife’s coffin? Will any wealth ‘minister to a mind diseased’? Will a mountain of material good calm and satisfy a man’s soul? You see faces just as discontented, looking out of carriage windows, as you meet in the street. ‘Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.’ There is no proportion between abundance of external good of any kind and happy hearts. We all know that the man who is rich is not happier than the poor man. And I, for my part, believe that the raw material of happiness is very equally distributed through the world, and that it is altogether a hallucination by which a poor man thinks, ‘If I were wealthy like that other man, how different my life would be.’ No, it would not; you would be the same man. The rich man that fancies that because he is rich he is ‘better off,’ as they say, than his poor brother, and the poor man who thinks that he would be ‘better off’ if he were richer than he is now, are the same man turned inside out, so to speak; and common to both of them is that fallacy, that wealth and material good contribute much to the real blessedness and nobleness of the man who happens to own it.

But then, perhaps, we have rather to regard this unrighteous mammon as so designated from another point of view. You will remember that all through the context our Lord has been insisting on the notion of stewardship. And I take it that what He means here is to remind us that whenever we claim any of our possessions, especially our external ones, as our own, we thereby are guilty of defrauding both God and man, and are unrighteous, and it is unrighteous thereby. Stewardship is a word which describes our relation to all that we have. Forget that, and then whatever you have becomes ‘the unrighteous mammon.’ There is the point in which Christ’s teaching joins hands with a great deal of unchristian teaching in this present day which is called Socialism and Communism. Christianity is not communistic. It asserts as against other men your right of property, but it limits that right by this, that if you interpret your right of property to mean the right to ‘do what you like with your own,’ ignoring your stewardship to God, and the right of your fellows to share in what you have, then you are an unfaithful steward, and your mammon is unrighteous. And that principle, the true communism of Christianity, has to be worked into modern society in a way that some of us do not dream of, before modern society will be organised on Christian principles. These words of my text are no toothless words which are merely intended to urge Christian people on to a sentimental charity, and to a niggardly distribution of part of their possessions: but they underlie the whole conception of ownership, as the New Testament sets it forth. Wherever the stewardship that we owe to God, and the participation that we owe to men, are neglected in regard to anything that we have, there God’s good gifts are perverted and have become ‘unrighteous mammon.’

And, then, on the other hand, our Lord sets forth here the contrast in regard to ‘the true riches’, which are such, inasmuch as they really correspond to the idea of wealth being a true good to a man, and making him rich to all the intents of bliss. He that has the treasures of a pure mind, of a lofty aim, of a quiet conscience, of a filled and satisfied and therefore calmed heart; he that has the treasure of salvation; he that has the boundless wealth of God--he has the bullion, while the poor rich people that have the material good have the scrip of an insolvent company, which is worth no more than the paper on which it is written. There are two currencies-one solid metal, the other worthless paper. The one is ‘true riches,’ and the other the ‘unrighteous mammon.’

Then there is a last contrast, and that is with regard to the reality of our possession. On the one hand, that which I fondly call my own is by our Lord stamped with the proprietor’s mark, of somebody else, ‘that which is Another’s.’ It was His before He gave it, it was His when He gave it, it is His after He has given it. My name is never to be written on my property so as to erase the name of the Owner. I am a steward; I am a trustee; it all belongs to Him. That is one rendering of this word. But the phrase may perhaps point in another direction. It may suggest how shadowy and unreal, as being merely external, and how transitory is our ownership of wealth and outward possessions. A man says, ‘It is mine.’ What does he mean by that? It is not his own in any real sense. I get more good out of a rich man’s pictures, or estate, if I look at them with an eye that loves them, than he does. The world belongs to the man that can enjoy it and rightly use it. And the man that enjoys it and uses it aright is the man who lives in God. Nothing is really yours except that which has entered into the substance of your soul, and become incorporated with your very being, so that, as in wool dyed in the grain, the colour will never come out. What I am, that I have; what I only have, that, in the deepest sense, I have not. ‘Shrouds have no pockets,’ says the Spanish proverb. ‘His glory will not descend after him,’ says the psalm. That is a poor possession which only is outward whilst it lasts, and which ends so soon. But there is wealth that comes into me. There are riches that cannot be parted from me. I can make my own a great inheritance, which is wrought into the very substance of my being, and will continue so inwrought, into whatsoever worlds or states of existence any future may carry me. So, and only so, is anything my own. Let these contrasts dominate our lives.

I see our space is gone; I must make this sermon a fragment, and leave what I intended to have made the last part of it for possible future consideration. Only let me press upon you in one closing word this, that the durable riches are only found in God, and the riches that can be found in God are brought to every one of us by Him ‘in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge,’ of goodness and grace. If we will make ourselves poor, by consciousness of our need, and turn with faith to Jesus, then we shall receive from Him those riches which are greatest, which are true, which are our own in that they pass into our very being, in that they were destined for us from all eternity by the love of God; and in having them we shall be rich indeed, and for ever.

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 16:10. Ὁ πιστὸς, he who is faithful) The mention of mammon being repeated (Luk 16:9, and Luk 16:11), indicates that this has a close connection with what goes before. And yet it is not prudence now, as heretofore, but fidelity, which the Lord commends. For fidelity generates and directs prudence. Πιστὸς, ἀληθινὸν (נאמן), and πιστεύσει, are conjugates.—ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ, in that which is least) Theology concerns itself with the greatest and with the least things. For it is in this view that the antithetic word πολλῷ, “in much,” acquires also the force of a superlative, as רַב.—ἄδικος, unjust) In antithesis to πιστὸς, faithful.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk_16:10-12. These verses give more detailed information regarding the precept in Luk_16:9. Without the specified application of the possessions of Mammon, to wit, ye cannot receive the Messianic riches. This is shown, on the ground of a general principle of experience (Luk_16:10) from a twofold specific peculiarity of both kinds of wealth, by the argument a minori ad majus.

The faithful in the least is also faithful in much; and the unrighteous in the least is also unrighteous in much[200]a locus communis which is to be left in its entire proverbial generality. It is fitted for very varied application to individual cases. For what special conclusion it is here intended to serve as a major proposition is contained in Luk_16:11 f.

πιστὸς ἐν ἐλαχ. is conceived as one united idea. Comp. on Gal_3:26; Eph_4:1.

Luk_16:11. In the unrighteous Mammon (here also neuter, and altogether as in Luk_16:9) those are faithful who, according to the precept in Luk_16:9, so apply it that they make for themselves friends therewith. This faithfulness is meant not from the standpoint of the mammon-mind, but of the divine mind (Luk_16:13).

ἐγένεσθε] have become, before the Messianic decision,an expression of the moral development.

τὸ ἀληθινόν] placed first as a more emphatic contrast to ἘΝ Τῷ ἈΔΊΚῼ ΜΑΜ. (comp. Luk_9:20, Luk_23:31): that which is true, which is not merely a wealth that is regarded as such, but (Jesus loquitur e sensu coelesti, Bengel) the ideally real and genuine riches (comp. on Joh_1:9), i.e. the salvation of the kingdom of Messiah. Observe the demonstrative force of the article. De Wette, Bleek, and many others, following older writers, wrongly understand the spiritual wealth, the Spirit; compare Olshausen: heavenly powers of the Spirit. It must be that which previously was symbolized by the reception into the everlasting habitations; hence also it cannot be the revealed truths, the Gospel (Ewald), or the spiritual riches of the kingdom of heaven (Wieseler), the gifts of grace (Lahmeyer), and the like. The objection against our view, that πιστεύσει is not in harmony with it (Wieseler), is not fatal, comp. Luk_19:17. The contrast indeed is not verbally complete (ἄδικον … δίκαιον), but substantially just, since anything that is unrighteous cannot be ΤῸ ἈΛΗΘΙΝΌΝ, but the two are essentially in contrast.

Luk_16:12. ἘΝ Τῷ ἈΛΛΟΤΡΊῼ] another specific attribute of the temporal riches, in what is alien, i.e. in that which belongs to another. For ye are not the possessor, but Mammon (in the parable the rich man whose wealth the οἰκονόμος did not possess, but only managed). Altogether arbitrary is the spiritualizing explanation of de Wette, that it is what does not immediately belong to the sphere of light and Spirit (comp. Lahmeyer), as well as that of Hölbe, in the truth which belongs to God. The contrary: ΤῸ ὙΜΈΤΕΡΟΝ, that which is yours, by which again is characterized not spiritual wealth, but the salvation of the Messianic kingdom,to wit, as that which shall be the property of man, for that is indeed the hereditary possession, the κληρονομία (Act_20:32; Rom_8:17; Gal_3:18; Eph_1:14; Mat_25:34, and elsewhere), the treasure laid up by him in heaven (Mat_6:19-21), his ΠΟΛΊΤΕΥΜΑ in heaven (Php_3:20), not a mere possession by stewardship of that which belongs to another as its owner, as is the case in respect of earthly wealth. It is an arbitrary interpolation in H. Bauer, op. cit. p. 540 f., who understands ἐλάχιστον and ἈΛΛΌΤΡΙΟΝ as the ἌΔΙΚΟς ΜΑΜ. of the legal condition, to which is to be attributed no absolute significance.

[200] Views in harmony with vv. 10 and 12 occur in Clem. Cor. Luk_2:8; but to conclude therefrom that there is a relationship with the gospel of the Egyptians (Köstlin, p. 223) is very arbitrary.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 16:10-13 . These verses contain not so much an application as a corrective of the parable. They may have been added by Lk. (so J. Weiss in Meyer, and Holtzmann, H. C.) to prevent misunderstanding, offence, or abuse, so serving the same purpose as the addition “unto repentance” to the saying, “I came not to call,” etc. (Luk 5:32 ); another instance of editorial solicitude on the part of an evangelist ever careful to guard the character and teaching of Jesus against misunderstanding. So viewed, their drift is: “the steward was dishonest in money matters; do not infer that it does not matter whether you be honest or not in that sphere. It is very necessary to be faithful even there. For faithful in little faithful in much, unfaithful in little unfaithful in much. He who is untrustworthy in connection with worldly goods is unworthy of being entrusted with the true riches; the unjust administrator of another’s property will not deserve confidence as an administrator even of his own. In the parable the steward tried to serve two masters, his lord and his lord’s creditors, and by so doing promoted his own interest. But the thing cannot be done, as even his case shows.” This corrective, if not spoken by Jesus, is not contrary to His teaching. (Luk 16:10 echoes Mat 25:21 , Luk 19:17 ; Luk 16:13 reproduces verbally the logion in Mat 6:24 .) Yet as it stands here it waters down the parable, and weakens the point of its teaching. Note the epithets applied to money: the little or least, the unjust , and, by implication, the fleeting, that which belongs to another ( τῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ ). Spiritual riches are the “much,” the “true” τὸ ἀληθινὸν , in the Johannine sense = the ideal as opposed to the vulgar shadowy reality, “our own” ( ἡμέτερον ).

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

We ought to take heed that for abusing our earthly function and duty, we be not deprived of heavenly gifts: for how can they use spiritual gifts aright, who abuse worldly things?

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

He, &c.--a maxim of great pregnancy and value; rising from the prudence which the steward had to the fidelity which he had not, the "harmlessness of the dove, to which the serpent" with all his "wisdom" is a total stranger. Fidelity depends not on the amount entrusted, but on the sense of responsibility. He that feels this in little will feel it in much, and conversely.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 10. He that is faithful in that which is least, c.] He who has the genuine principles of fidelity in him will make a point of conscience of carefully attending to even the smallest things and it is by habituating himself to act uprightly in little things that he acquires the gracious habit of acting with propriety fidelity, honour, and conscience, in matters of the greatest concern. On the contrary, he who does not act uprightly in small matters will seldom feel himself bound to pay much attention to the dictates of honour and conscience, in cases of high importance. Can we reasonably expect that a man who is continually falling by little things has power to resist temptations to great evils?

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(10) He that is faithful in that which is least . . .—The context shows that by “that which is least” is meant what men call wealth, and which to most of them seems as the greatest, highest good. To be faithful in that is to acknowledge that we have it as stewards, not as possessors, and shall have to give an account of our stewardship. The word of warning was meant, we may believe, specially for the disciples. They, coming, for the most part, from the poorer classes, thought that they were in no danger of worshipping mammon. They are told, probably with special reference to the traitor Judas, that the love of money may operate on a narrow as well as on a wide scale, and that wrong-doing in the one case tests character not less perfectly than in the other. This seems truer to the meaning of “much” than to find in it simply the higher wealth of the kingdom of God, generically different from the former, though this also may be included in the wider operation of the laws thus asserted.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. faithful in that which is least] Comp. Luk_19:17. The most which we can have in this world is ‘least’ compared to the smallest gift of heaven.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He that is faithful in that which is least,.... In quantity and quality, especially the latter; in that which is of little value and worth, at least when compared with other things:

is faithful also in much: in matters of greater consequence and importance: the sense of the proverb is, that, generally speaking, a man that acts a faithful part in a small trust committed to him, does so likewise in a much larger; and being tried, and found faithful in things of less moment, he is intrusted with things of greater importance; though this is not always the case: for sometimes a man may behave with great integrity in lesser matters, on purpose that he might gain greater confidence, which, when he has obtained, he abuses in the vilest manner; but because it is usually otherwise, our Lord uses the common proverb; and of like sense is the following;

and he that is unjust in the least, is unjust also in much: that man that acts the unfaithful part in a small matter, and of little worth, generally does the same, if a greater trust is committed to him.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.

Ver. 10. He that is faithful] Mr Diodati’s note here is, "The right use of riches in believers is a trial of their loyal use of their spiritual graces and gifts. And, on the contrary, the abuse of the one showeth the abuse of the other. God likewise taketh away his spiritual graces from them, who do not use the temporal ones well."

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He that is faithful ... - This is a maxim which will almost universally hold true. A man that shows fidelity in small matters will also in large; and he that will cheat and defraud in little things will also in those involving more trust and responsibility. Fidelity is required in small matters as well as in those of more importance.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

He that is faithful in that which is least. This seems to have been a common saying, and that men judged of the honesty of their servants by their fidelity in lesser matters. For example, a master that sees his servant will not steal a little thing, judges that he will not steal a greater, &c. --- And he that is unjust in that which is little, is unjust also in that which is greater. The interpreters take notice, that here temporal goods are called little, and spiritual goods are called greater; so that the sense is, that such men as do not make a right use of their temporal goods, in the service of God, will not make a good use of spiritual graces as they ought to do. See Maldonatus. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

This is a usual sentence, (our Saviour made use of many such), as to which kind of speeches it is not necessary they should be universally true, it is sufficient if they generally be so. Besides that, our Saviour plainly speaketh here according to the common opinion and judgment of men. Men ordinarily judge that he who is faithful in a little thing, of no high concern or moment, will be faithful in what is of a higher concern, or greater moment; and if they have found a person unfaithful in a small thing, they will conclude that he will he so in a greater, and not trust him: though sometimes it falls out otherwise, that one who is faithful enough in some trifling things, prove unfaithful in a greater trust, where unfaithfulness will turn more to his profit; and on the contrary, he that is untruthful in a little thing, may prove more faithful in a greater; but none will trust to that: and that is our Saviour’s design, to teach us that God will do by us as we in the like case do by our servants or neighbours.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

10-12. In these three verses (which are the moral of the parable) the three terms, the least, the unrighteous mammon, and that which is another man’s, all mean essentially the same thing; namely, the earthly, the temporal, the finite. In contrast to each of these, separately, are the terms much, the true riches, and that which is your own; by which are meant the heavenly, the eternal, the infinite. The sentiment then given in each verse in succession is this: if we are unfaithful in temporal things we are unfaithful for eternity.

10. Faithful in… least… in much—If we are faithful in this world’s least, we are faithful for eternity’s

much. Unjust in the least… in much—Our least sin is committed for eternity, and if unforgiven must result in an eternal woe proportionate to its guilt. We may, by our degrees of unrighteousness, more or less sink ourselves deeper into perdition; but the slightest unremoved condemnation is eternal.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much. This and the next three verses are closely connected with the parable of the unjust steward. Our Lord no doubt continued speaking, and these four verses contain a general resume of what may be called his reflections on the important piece of teaching he had just delivered. We have here the broad rule, upon which God will decide the soul"s future, laid down. If the man has been faithful in his administration of the comparatively unimportant goods of earth, it is clear that he can be entrusted with the far more important things which belong to the world to come. There is, too, in these words a kind of limitation and explanation of the foregoing parable of the unjust steward. The conduct of that steward, regarded in one point of view, was held to be wise, and we, though in a very different way, were advised to imitate it; yet here we are distinctly told that it is fidelity, not unfaithfulness, which will be eventually re-warded the just, not the unjust steward.

The wisdom of fidelity.

Between the text and the verse that precedes it there is some interval of thought. There may have occurred a remark made by one of our Lord"s apostles: or we may supply the words, as to the supreme importance and obligatoriness of fidelity, there is the strongest reason for being faithful at all times and in everything;" for "he that is faithful in that which is least," etc. This utterance of our Lord is seen to be profoundly true, if we consider

I THE LAW OF INWARD GROWTH. The Lord of our nature knew that it was "in man" to do any act more readily and easily the second time than the first, the third than the second, and so on continually; that every disposition, faculty, principle, grows by exercise. This is true in the physical, the mental, and also in the spiritual sphere. It applies to acts of submission, of obedience, of courage, of service. One who is faithful today will find it a simpler and easier thing to be faithful to-morrow. The boy who faithfully studies at school, scorning to cheat either his teacher or his fellows, will be the apprentice who faithfully masters his business or his profession; and he will be the merchant on whom every one may rely in large transactions in the market; and he will be the minister of state who will be trusted with the conduct of imperial affairs. Fidelity of habit will grow into strong spiritual principle, and will form a large and valuable part of a holy and Christ-like character. "He that is faithful in that which is least will," in the natural order of spiritual things, "be faithful also in much." Of course, the converse of this is equally true.

II THE PRINCIPLE OF DIVINE REWARD. God blesses uprightness in the very act, for he makes the upright man something the better and the stronger for his act of faithfulness. That is much, but that is not all. He holds out to faithfulness the promise of a reward in the future. This promise is twofold:

1. It is one of heavenly wealth, or wealth of the highest order. The proprietor of the estate (ver. 1) would remove the unfaithful steward altogether; but he would treat faithfulness very differently he would be prepared to give him something so much better that it might even be called "true riches" (ver. 11); nay, he might even go so far as to give him lands, vineyards, which he should not farm for another, but for himself, which he should call "his own" (ver. 12). The Divine Husbandman will reward fidelity in his service by granting to his diligent servants "the true riches;" not that about which there is so much of the fictitious, the disappointing, the burdensome, as there is about all earthly good, but that which really gladdens the heart, brightens the path, ennobles the life that noble heritage which awaits the "faithful unto death" in the heavenly country.

2. It is inalienable wealth, that will not pass. Here a man points to his estate and says complacently, "This is mine." But it is only his in a secondary sense. He has the legal use of it, to the exclusion of every other while he lives. But it is alienable. Disaster may come and compel him to part with it; death will come and undo the bond which binds it to him. It is only his in a certain limited sense. Of nothing visible and material can we say strictly that it is "our own." But if we are faithful to the end, God will one day endow us with wealth with which we shall not be called to part; of which no revolution will rob us, of which death will not deprive us the inalienable estate of heavenly honour and blessedness; that will be "our own" for ever.

III THE GROUND FOR PRAISE AND PATIENCE.

1. Bless God that he is now righteously endowing and enlarging his faithfulness.

2. Live in the well-assured hope that the future will disclose a much larger sphere for spiritual integrity. C.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

And whether ye have more or less, see that ye be faithful as well as wise stewards. He that is faithful in what is meanest of all, worldly substance, is also faithful in things of a higher nature; and he that uses these lowest gifts unfaithfully, is likewise unfaithful in spiritual things.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Our blessed Saviour having declared to his followers, in the foregoing verses, the great advantage they shall reap by a charitable distribution of temporal good things, he acquaints them in these verses with the great detriment and disadvantage that will redound to them if they do otherwise.

1. If they be not faithful in rightly employing temporal riches, they must not expect that God will entrust them with spiritual and heavenly, which are the true riches. God will deal with his servants, as we deal with ours, never trust them with much, whom we find unfaithful in a little.

2. If they be not faithful in the improvement of these outward things, which God entrusts them with but for a time, and must shortly leave them to others; how can they expect, that God should give them those spiritual good things, which shall never be taken away from them to whom they are given.

Where note, 1. That the riches we have are called not our own, but another man’s’ If we have not been faithful in that which is another man’s. Because God has not made us proprietors, but dispensers; not owners, but stewards of these things; we have them for others, and must leave them to others; we are only trustees for the poor; if much be put into our hands, it is to dispense to others according to our Master’s orders; let us be faithful then in that which is another man’s; that is, with what God puts into our hand for the benefit of others.

Note, 2. That though our gifts are not our own; yet grace or spiritual goods are our own: others may have all the benefit of our gifts, but we shall have the benefit and comfort of our own grace; this treasure we cannot leave to others, and it shall never be taken away from ourselves.

Note, 3. That God is just, and will be eternally justified in denying his special grace to those, who do not make use of his common gifts. Would men be faithful in improving a little, God would entrust them with more; did they not abuse the trust of his common gifts, he would not deny them the treasure of his saving grace, called here, The true riches.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He who is faithful ... is also faithful ... he who is unrighteous ... is also unrighteous

"People who are faithful ... are also faithful ... people who are unrighteous ... are also unrighteous." This would include women. (See: When Masculine Words Include Women)

faithful in very little

"faithful even with small things." Make sure this does not sound like they are not very faithful.

unrighteous in very little

"unrighteous even in small things." Make sure this does not sound like they are not often unrighteous.

unrighteous wealth

See how you translated this in Luke 16:09. Possible meanings are 1) Jesus uses metonymy when he calls money "unrighteous" because people sometimes earn it or use it in unrighteous ways. AT: "even money that you earned dishonestly" or 2) Jesus uses hyperbole when he calls money "unrighteous" because it has no eternal value. AT: "money, which has no eternal value" or "by using worldly money" (See: Metonymy and Hyperbole and Generalization)

who will trust you with true wealth?

Jesus uses a question to teach the people. AT: "no one will trust you with true wealth." or "no one will give you true wealth to manage." (See: Rhetorical Question)

true wealth

This refers to wealth that is more genuine, real, or lasting than money.

who will give you money of your own?

Jesus uses this question to teach the people. AT: "no one will give you wealth for yourself." (See: Rhetorical Question)

translationWords

faithful

righteous

world

trust

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

10. ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ. Comp. Luk 19:17. The most which we can have in this world is ‘least’ compared to the smallest gift of heaven.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10-12.] Closely connected with the foregoing (against De Wette and Strauss):—the ‘faithfulness in the least’ is the same as the prudence and shrewdness just spoken of;—in the case of the children of light they run up into one—τίς ἐστιν ὁ πιστὸς οἰκονόμος καὶ φρόνιμος, ch. 12:42;—the ἐλάχιστον = ὁ ἄδικος (see above: not “fallacious,” as Wordsw.) μαμωνᾶς = τὸ ἀλλότριον—the wealth of this present world, which is not the Christian’s own, nor his proper inheritance. The πολύ = τὸ ἀληθινόν = το ὑμέτερον = the true riches of God’s inheritance: of which the earth (see Mat 5:5) forms a part, which ὁ θεός (implied in the τίς—for there will be none to give it you if you be untrue during this state of probation;—He will not be your God) shall give to you. The wealth of this world is ἀλλότριον—forfeited by sin—only put into our hands to try us, and to be rendered an account of.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

10. We have here a general principle which is capable of application in a variety of spheres. The reference to the parable is less direct than in ver. 9.

ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ. “In very little” rather than “in that which is least.” Comp. 19:17. We find in Irenæus, Si in modico fideles non fuistis, quod magnum est quis dabit vobis (2:34, 3), which is probably a loose quotation of Lk. made from memory. In the so-called 2 Ep. Clem Rom we have a similarly fused citation: εἰ τὸ μικρὸν οὐκ ἐτηρήσατε, τὸ μέγα τίͅ ὑμῖν δώσει ; λέγω γὰρ ὑμῖν ὄτι ὁ πιστὸͅ ἐν ἐλαχίστῳ καὶ ἐν πολλῷ πιστόͅ ἐστιν (8.), which some suppose to have come from an apocryphal gospel, and others to be the source used by Irenæus. Comp. Hippol. Hær. 10:29, ἵνα ἐπὶ τῷ μικρῷ πιστὸͅ εὑρεθεὶͅ καὶ τὸ μέγα πιστευθῆναι δυνηθῇͅ. All three are probably reminiscences of Lk. Comp. Mat 25:21, Mat 25:23.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

That which is least. A general proposition, yet with a reference to mammon as the least of things. See next verse.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 10-13. “He that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much; and he that is unjust in the least, is unjust also in much. 11. If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mammon, who will commit to your trust that which is true? 12. And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own? 13. No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.”

Many regard these reflections as arbitrarily placed here by Luke. But whatever Bleek may say, is it not just the manner in which we constitute ourselves proprietors of our earthly goods, which leads us to make a use of them which is contrary to their true destination? The following piece, therefore, derives its explanation from the parable, and is directly connected with it. Luk 16:12 (τῷ ἀλλοτρίῳ) would even be unintelligible apart from it.

Ver. 10 is a comparison borrowed from common life. From the experience expressed in the two parallel propositions of this verse, it follows that a master does not think of elevating to a higher position the servant who has abused his confidence in matters of less importance. Faithful toward the master, unjust toward men.

The application of this rule of conduct to believers, Luk 16:11-12. The unrighteous mammon is God’s money, which man unjustly takes as his own. Faithfulness would have implied, above all, the employment of those goods in the service of God; but our deprivation once pronounced (death), it implies their employment in our interest rightly understood by means of beneficence. Through lack of this fidelity or wisdom, we establish our own incapacity to administer better goods if they were confided to us; therefore God will not commit them to us. Those goods are called τὸ ἀληθινόν, the true good, that which corresponds really to the idea of good. The contrast has misled several commentators to give to the word ἄδικος the meaning of deceitful. This is to confound the word ἀληθινός with ἀληθής (veracious). The real good is that which can in no case be changed to its opposite. It is not so with money, which is at best a provisional good, and may even be a source of evil. This is the application of 10a; Luk 16:12 is that of 10b. Earthly goods are called another’s good, that is to say, a good which strictly belongs to another than ourselves (God). As it is faithfulness to God, so it is justice to man, to dispose of them with a view to our poor neighbour. That which is our own denotes the good for which we are essentially fitted, which is the normal completion of our being, the Divine Spirit become our own spirit by entire assimilation, or in the words of Jesus, the kingdom prepared for us from the foundation of the world. Our Lord’s thought is therefore this: God commits to man, during his earthly sojourn in the state of probation, goods belonging to Him, which are of less value (earthly things); and the use, faithful or unfaithful, just or unjust, which we make of these settles the question whether our true patrimony (the goods of the Spirit, of which the believer himself receives only the earnest here below) shall or shall not be granted to him above. Like a rich father, who should trust his son with a domain of little value, that he might be trained later in life to manage the whole of his inheritance, thus putting his character to the proof, so God exposes external seeming goods of no value to the thousand abuses of our unskilful administration here below, that from the use which we make of them there may one day be determined for each of us whether we shall be put in possession, or whether we shall be deprived of our true eternal heritage,—the good which corresponds to our inmost nature. The entire philosophy of our terrestial existence is contained in these words.

Ver. 13, which closes this piece, is still connected with the image of the parable: the steward had two masters, whose service he could not succeed in reconciling, the owner of the revenue which he was managing, and money, which he was worshipping.

The two parallel propositions of this verse are usually regarded as identical in meaning, and as differing only in the position assigned to each of the two masters successively as the objects of the two opposite feelings. But Bleek justly observes, that the absence of the article before ἕνος in the second proposition seems to forbid our taking this pronoun as the simple repetition of the preceding τὸν ἕνα in the first; he therefore gives it a more general sense, the one or the other of the two preceding, and places the whole difference between the two parallel propositions in the graduated meaning of the different verbs employed, holding to being less strong than loving, and despising less strong than hating. Thus: “He will hate the one and love the other; or at least, he will hold more either to the one or other of the two, which will necessarily lead him to neglect the service of the other.”

It makes no material difference.

This verse, whatever the same learned critic may say, concludes this discourse perfectly, and forms the transition to the following piece, in which we find a sincere worshipper of Jehovah perishing because he has practically made money his God. The place which this verse occupies in Matthew in the Sermon on the Mount (Luk 6:24) is also suitable, but somewhat uncertain, like that of the whole piece of which it forms part.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.