Tag Archives: hospitality

Unexpected provision

Posted on by
1

In my previous post, I looked at Elijah’s preparation for this moment when God will bring three people together to provide for each others’ needs. Read along in 1 Kings 17:7-16.

Now we meet a Sidonian mother who is the very picture of dependency. This woman might be described as “house poor”: living in a 2-storey house4 in a resort town suggests she may once have had a better life.5 She lives in a paternalistic society, where widows lack legal rights outside of bearing a son.3 The book of Ruth gives us a glimpse of the life of a couple of widows, and the bitterness Naomi felt from the way her life turned out (Ruth 1). On top of that, the way she sees the world is likely framed by a narrative like this one: her people have been marginalized for centuries; Joshua, David and Solomon were not able to dislodge them from their land,5 and they have a long history of worshiping a god who angers Yahweh. So she’s stigmatized and oppressed by Elijah’s people, and she’s caught downstream from a political and religious battle between those in power.

Think of all the minoritized demographics all wrapped up in this one woman! Take a minute to absorb the context and put yourself in her shoes. Feel her hunger pangs and her concern for her son. And consider why she’s outside the gate of the city gathering sticks. 

It’s remarkable to think about the sources God summons to meet Elijah’s needs. So often we form our own idea of how God will provide, or we even strategize as if God needs our suggestions. But the God described as owning the cattle on a thousand hills (Ps 50:10) shows here that he can mobilize that provision through the most unexpected conduits. As Jesus asks rhetorically (Luke 4:25-26), why would God choose this woman of all possible providers for Elijah? If it had to be a widow, there were Jewish widows and even wealthy widows. Everything is upside down from our expectations.

How would this widow in a Baal-worshipping region respond to God’s command? We know the birds will obey their Creator, but will she? Funny enough, the text doesn’t tell us whether God briefed her on her role. It’s difficult to interpret in the brief clips of conversation whether she was sarcastic or resentful or open. I’ve tried reading them with different tones of voice.

Her provision starts with hospitality for the weary prophet. When Elijah comes to her, she welcomes him… to some degree. To western ears, his requests seem rude.4 For instance, his first request for water is basic, but note that he’s asking for the very resource that he’s responsible for making rare and overpriced! To eastern ears, her response is rude. She skips a number of steps of hospitality expected in that culture—such as inviting him to rest or giving him water to wash his feet after his journey—some of which were affordable even to one living at her level of poverty.5

Elijah’s requests come with a promise (v14), but they’re a big leap of faith for this woman: a third of her last meal, and he must have the first portion. Why should she believe the promise of the God of Israel, a foreign deity? Perhaps it’s desperation that forces her to place her trust in the word of “Yahweh-is-God.” Joseph Bayode observes about this decision point6:

She had every reason to say no. She was desperate. She had a child to protect. She had only enough for one last supper and a slow, sorrowful death. But instead of resisting, she obeyed. She gave out of her lack, not her abundance. And in that moment, her faith triggered divine provision.

The Sidonian widow has to make two leaps: Elijah’s God can be her provider, but he also intends for her to be a provider.7 What mental and cultural barriers does the Sidonian widow overcome to say yes? 

Perhaps more relevant to us, what mental and cultural barriers does Elijah have to overcome to receive God’s provision from this woman? What does this man of power, access and comparative wealth have to learn in order to receive help?

I’m struck by the empathy required in God’s solution. First, Elijah becomes equal with the woman and her son. The Old Testament regularly lumps foreigners, the fatherless and widows as similar vulnerable populations under legal protection4 (see examples such as Dt 10:18-19 and 24:17-21). For all the power, influence and relative wealth Elijah possesses, he is no different from her.

Second, the next weeks and years ahead are a matter of daily faith and struggle, because God doesn’t provide all at once. Oil and flour that never run dry are not a source of wealth building, but a means of daily subsistence requiring continued faith. 

The three have to negotiate a co-existence. In order for Elijah’s needs to be met, God forces him to wade into the woman’s world of poverty—not aloof or indifferent, but showing concern about her daily need.8 Digging out of a poverty cycle is not a quick or easy thing. He has to walk with her as she wrestles free of the multiple levels of material, mental, emotional and spiritual poverty. He is an expression of Immanuel—God with us—to this woman.

It leaves me wondering: What mental blocks do we need to challenge as we think about sources of provision? What if God wants to move his Church away from an unhealthy dependence on Western funding? And what if he wants to challenge our view of wealth as a prerequisite for provision. It’s counter-intuitive, but God has all the resources, and sometimes he directs them through surprising conduits.

This story shows that everyone can participate in his mission. There’s a great example in 2 Corinthians 8:1-5, when the first-generation Macedonian churches, in their poverty and youthful passion, begged for the privilege of contributing to God’s work. God has a very different view of assets than we do. He often starts with what’s in our hands, as he did with Moses and his staff (Ex 4:2). And as he does here with the flour and oil. He’s the originator of the asset-based-development strategy. 

For that matter, what about sources of truth and sources of authority? We’re living in a day when the center of Christianity has moved outside the West. The centers of influence for the global Church are now in places with a much younger Church. Are we willing to receive calls to Biblical orthodoxy from places like Rwanda and Ghana? Are we willing to be challenged by the development of Indigenous theology coming out of Brazil and Indonesia?

As leaders, it’s a good time to re-orient our posture toward this new era for the Church. Ask yourself: what mental barriers you need to break in order to be ready for what God wants to do?

Reference (intentionally seeking non-Western views)
3. Seifert, Marlon. (Brazil)
4. van der Walt, J.S. (South Africa)
5. Gafney, Wil. (U.S., African American) “Hermeneutics of Reversal: Widow of Zarephath.” Womanists Wading in the Word. 18 March 2022. https://www.wilgafney.com/2022/03/18/hermeneutics-of-reversal-widow-of-zarephath/
6. Bayode, Joseph. (Nigeria) “The Widow of Zarephath.” Medium. 4 May 2025  https://medium.com/@JosephBayode/the-widow-of-zarephath-38c8957dc5a2
7. Claassens, Juliana. (South Africa) “Commentary on 1 Kings 17:8-16.” Working Preacher. 8 Nov 2009. https://www.workingpreacher.org/commentaries/revised-common-lectionary/ordinary-32-2/commentary-on-1-kings-178-16-3
8. Hunter, Max. (U.S., African American) “Racial Reconciliation in the New Creation: 1 Kings 17.”The Center for Biblical and Theological Education, Seattle Pacific University. August 2014. https://spu.edu/lectio/racial-reconciliation-in-the-new-creation/

Elijah series:

Romans 12 – love your team

Posted on by
4

9 Don’t just pretend to love others. Really love them. Hate what is wrong. Hold tightly to what is good. 10 Love each other with genuine affection, and take delight in honoring each other….

13 When God’s people are in need, be ready to help them. Always be eager to practice hospitality….

15 Be happy with those who are happy, and weep with those who weep.

My intern did a survey this summer of a lot of leaders in our office. One of the questions he asked was what they considered their leadership strengths. While a number named characteristics traditionally thought of as “strong and bold” — visionary, decisive and strategic thinking, for instance — I was happy with the number of times some “alternative” characteristics came up: listening, serving, understanding context and caring for their team. I’m not sure how many business schools or leadership courses emphasize that last one.

I think there are two problematic areas in leadership today related to this topic. First, the “old school” line of thought is that leaders should distance themselves from their teams. It’s built on the idea that you can’t uphold the discipline necessary in the manager-subordinate relationship if you let your co-workers become your friends. I get it. I know I’m making it more difficult for myself, but I just can’t keep that distance. For one, it compartmentalizes my life too much. I pour a good portion of my life into my teams. And two, I think the problems outweigh the benefits. For a team to be successful, Patrick Lencioni says in 3 Signs of a Miserable Job, the manager needs to know each team member. If this is true in a for-profit context, how much more should it be true in a Christian ministry context? Managers should know when their staff members are weeping inside and when they’re jumping up and down at home. Managers should know when they’re in need.

The other major problem is that managers fake care for their teams. The trend right now is to offer all kinds of flex time and benefits for employees, making the corporation feel more socially conscious and family-oriented. Managers are encouraged to empower their teams and give them voice. Former Yahoo exec Tim Sanders has built a speaking tour on the principle of love being the “Killer App.” But greater benefits, social consciousness, family orientation and empowerment don’t necessarily equate with love. How many managers really love their staff members? What does that look like?

Loving your team means all your actions honor the people you work with. It means you’re a developer of people. It means you hold them to high standards. For instance, you don’t tolerate cutting corners, and you don’t allow gossip to undermine the team. And it means when you fire someone — because you love them too much to let them underperform or break the rules — or have to lay someone off, you bend over backwards to care for them and make sure they land on their feet.

It means taking delight in honoring your team. The starting point is that in success, you’re a window, pointing to the team’s contribution and in failure, you’re a mirror, taking credit for your own part in the mistakes.

I think to delight in honoring someone has to include individualization. Every person on your team has a different way of feeling appreciated. When you notice a person’s “love language” and show appreciation in the language that speaks to them — which might not include public praise — I think they feel known, and they feel honored. When you ask them their favorite food for a party and then use that to celebrate a milestone, they feel known and honored.

Note: Individualism doesn’t come naturally to everyone. I wish I was one of those leaders who can remember everyone’s name, birthday and kids’ names. Some people have a natural gift that way, and it really gives the impression of love. I used to beat myself up that I couldn’t do that. Then I stopped making excuses and started cheating with the tools I have at hand. At times in my leadership career, I’ve kept spreadsheets that record children’s names, love language, appreciation gifts I’ve given in the past, favorite drinks and important dates. It can be an act of love that you noticed and that you thought it important enough to write it down.

Loving your team might mean you set up a system to identify needs, because most people are too proud to tell you, and then a system to help meet those needs. A lot of people are struggling right now, but they put on a face of professionalism when they come to work. Most colleagues will never know the pain they’re in. So, how can we allow people to share their need? How can we allow an intermediate to tactfully alert others to our needs? And how can a manager participate in meeting those needs?

Loving your team means you practice hospitality. Instead of keeping the distance, invite them into your life and into your home. Hospitality is actually one of the qualifications of a church elder (1 Timothy 3:2). I think it should be a mark for any ministry leader.

And I think that’s the point here. Ministries should be able to become more professional without having to copy the cutthroat measures of the corporate world. Love should be the mark of any leader in a ministry setting. And I think Tim Sanders has one thing right: the business world would be a better place if they copied the ministry world a little more. I suspect they’d even find that love is profitable.