+ In the Name of our loving God+
One
of the shortest homilies I ever heard was one given in our neighboring church, to
the east of us, at Sacred Heart, some 40 years ago by the priest who, after the
Gospel reading, presented his homily saying something on the order of, “Some of
the Gospel readings and the things Jesus says are not always easy to understand
today and we may find them confusing.
This is one of them,” and then he sat down, ending his homily. I can understand his thinking after today’s
Gospel lesson.
The
Episcopal priest and theologian, Robert Capon wrote a series of books on the
Parables of Jesus in which he called this parable, about the dishonest manager,
“The Hardest Parable.[1]”
Capon
wrote that because of the difficulty in understanding its meaning and purpose, some
priests, pastors, ministers, and theologians question its authenticity; as in,
questioning whether it was something Jesus actually said.
Others
simply cherry pick their way around the parable and go to Jesus’ interpretive
explanation of it; sticking with topics like “those who are faithful in a
little are likely to be faithful in much” or “those who are dishonest in little
will be dishonest in much.” Another
popular topic is about serving two masters; that you will either love the one
or hate the other, that you cannot love worldly wealth and God.[2] All
are all good topics to preach on and are also very effective ways to avoid
talking about this parable.
What
makes this parable difficult to understand is what Jesus says at the end of his
telling it:
“And
(the household manger’s) master commended the
dishonest manager because he had acted shrewdly; for the children of this age
are more shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of
light. And I tell you, make friends for yourselves by means of dishonest wealth
so that when it is gone, they may welcome you into the eternal homes.”[3]
“Make
friends by means of dishonest wealth so that when it is gone, they may welcome
you into the eternal homes?” What does
Jesus mean by that statement?
To
answer that question, we need to back up and put this parable in context both
with regard to the time in which Jesus is telling it and with regard to its
placement within the Gospel of Luke.
It’s
placement within Luke is significant. This
parable immediately follows the Jesus’ parable of the Prodigal Son, a parable Jesus
addresses to a crowd of scribes, Pharisees, and those who Luke identifies as
sinners. In today’s Gospel lesson, Jesus is telling this parable to his
disciples – his inner circle of friends – his adopted family.
Both
parables share a common theme; squandering wealth, wasting it foolishly,
expending it selfishly until they find themselves entrapped by their behavior
and awakened to the fact that the only thing they have left to spend is
themselves. What might be lost on us is
the terminology of a household manager or a steward. We might think of such individuals in terms
of modern day employees, but in Jesus’s day a household manager or steward was
considered part of the household – part of the family. They lived in the same house as their master,
and they were trusted; treated as extended family like the ancient Roman concept
of pater familia, which gave the head
of household, the eldest male member of a family, complete authority over every
member of the household as he saw fit; including immediate family members, family
clients, freedmen, and slaves.
Then
there is the topic of wealth or money; something that Jesus, at times,
addresses directly as there being a right or wrong way of using it and
sometimes, metaphorically, as an example of the unearned grace of God given to
all. In this parable, Jesus addresses wealth
directly; identifying it as dishonest wealth or as unrighteous mammon in other
translations; which is to say that worldly wealth has no intrinsic spiritual
value.
Whether
worldly wealth is considered a bane or blessing is solely dependent on how it
is used; that loving or being obsessed with money, for instance, ultimately leads
to unrighteous behavior and immoral conduct.
According to Jesus’ parables, wealth (whatever form it takes) is best expended
in order to expand the Kingdom of God.
In
this parable, Jesus draws a fine line between selfish interest (an
unrighteousness sense of self-absorption) and true self-interest (a righteous
sense of knowing who we are and whose we are).
At
first sight, there doesn’t appear to be much difference between the manager squandering
his master’s wealth and reducing the debts owed his master by others.
What
defines this parable as a parable of grace is that the squandering manager is
considered shrewd (demonstrates good judgement) by the Lord of the household
because when awakened to the fact that his personal wellbeing is directly
linked to how well he is perceived and received by others, he was able to turn
things around in his favor. Specifically, the awakened manager turns his habit
of squandering his master’s wealth into a practice of reducing the debt owed by
others to his master in the hope of their seeing him in a favorable light.
Implicit
in the master’s praise of awakened manager is the master’s realization that by reducing
the debt of others, perhaps what they rightfully owe, the manager’s doing so
ultimately reflects the generosity of his master, who will be looked upon with
favor by those indebted to him. His
actions demonstrated true self interest by awakening to who he truly was; a member
of his master’s household, dependent on the favor of his master, that he
understood his actions reflected the actions of his master.
Jesus
also observed that “The children of this age are more
shrewd in dealing with their own generation than are the children of
light.” In other words, those outside
the religious circles frequently demonstrate astuteness in their dealings with
others; that they are not afraid of taking calculated risks in fostering
lasting friendships unlike those in religious circles, who frequently become
complacent and lack the ability to think outside the box they find themselves
in.
That Jesus is addressing his disciple with this parable should
give us pause to review how we, as a congregation, as disciples of Jesus,
should use the unrighteous mammon, the money that has been entrusted to us.
Are we spending it appropriately?
Are we expending it in order to expand the Kingdom of God?
Are we awake to who we truly are; the familia Christi, the family of Christ; the very Body of Christ in
the world.
Are we awakened to the reality that what we do as a congregation
reflects on how others outside these walls perceive God, whether God is generous,
whether God is forgiving, and whether God values them for who they are because
we value them for who they are?
What is in our best self-interest as a congregation moving forward?
Is it to preserve the things that will ultimately fade away, or is
it as members of the familia Christi to
be stewards of God’s grace; carrying out the redemptive work of Christ by using
the unrighteous mammon we are entrusted with to make friends for ourselves in
Christ so that when it fades away we will be welcomed by them into the eternal
dwellings?
* * * * * * * * * *
Until next time, stay faithful.
[1]
“The Parables of Grace,” Robert Farrar Capon; William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company,
Grand Rapids, Michigan ©1988, Chapter Fourteen, pg. 145
[2] Luke
16: 10 & 13
[3]
Luke 16: 8-9
No comments:
Post a Comment