Parable of the Unjust Steward (Luke 16:1-13)
1 Then he also said to his disciples, "A rich man had a steward who was reported to him for squandering his property.
2 He summoned him and said, 'What is this I hear about you? Prepare a full account of your stewardship, because you can no longer be my steward.'
3 The steward said to himself, 'What shall I do, now that my master is taking the position of steward away from me? I am not strong enough to dig and I am ashamed to beg.
4 I know what I shall do so that, when I am removed from the stewardship, they may welcome me into their homes.'
5 He called in his master's debtors one by one. To the first he said, 'How much do you owe my master?'
6 He replied, 'One hundred measures of olive oil.' He said to him, 'Here is your promissory note. Sit down and quickly write one for fifty.'
7 Then to another he said, 'And you, how much do you owe?' He replied, 'One hundred kors of wheat.' He said to him, 'Here is your promissory note; write one for eighty.'
8 And the master commended that dishonest steward for acting prudently. "For the children of this world are more prudent in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.
9 I tell you, make friends for yourselves with dishonest wealth, so that when it fails, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.
10 The person who is trustworthy in very small matters is also trustworthy in great ones; and the person who is dishonest in very small matters is also dishonest in great ones.
11 If, therefore, you are not trustworthy with dishonest wealth, who will trust you with true wealth?
12 If you are not trustworthy with what belongs to another, who will give you what is yours?
13 No servant can serve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
The parable of the dishonest steward has to be understood in the light of the Palestinian custom of agents acting on behalf of their masters and the usurious practices common to such agents. The dishonesty of the steward consisted in the squandering of his master's property (Luke 16:1) and not in any subsequent graft. The master commends the dishonest steward who has forgone his own usurious commission on the business transaction by having the debtors write new notes that reflected only the real amount owed the master (i.e., minus the steward's profit). The dishonest steward acts in this way in order to ingratiate himself with the debtors because he knows he is being dismissed from his position (Luke 16:3). The parable, then, teaches the prudent use of one's material goods in light of an imminent crisis.
comments by Carl E. Olson (Editor Catholic World Report):
This is the most puzzling of the parables. The parable has a similar structure to the parable of the unforgiving, or ungrateful, steward (Matt 18:23-35; Lk. 7:41-43), with three levels of social status: the master, the steward, and the debtors. But whereas the parable of the unforgiving steward is straightforward in its moral message—if you wish to receive forgiveness, you must extend forgiveness—the moral and message of the parable of the dishonest steward is not immediately clear.
First, the steward, who has misused his master’s money and so faces the loss of job and status, uses dishonest means in order to open doors for future prospects. He doesn’t admit his guilt, ask for forgiveness, or attempt to make matters right. Secondly, having changed the amounts due on the promissory notes (and thus ingratiating himself to the debtors), the steward is—shockingly—commended by his master. Why? Because he had, Jesus said, acted prudently.
At this point, many readers might understandably move from being puzzled to being perplexed. It seems that Jesus not only presented a parable condoning dishonest and self-serving behavior, but had actually praised it! But St. Augustine, in preaching upon this parable, stated that Jesus “surely did not approve of that cheat of a servant who cheated his master, stole from him and did not make it up from his own pocket.” So why, he asked, “did the Lord put this before us”? We must be careful to not miss what Jesus indicated was a key point of the parable: “For the children of this world are more prudent in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.”
And, in fact, Augustine writes that the parable is not meant to praise the sins of the steward but to extol him “because he exercised foresight for the future. When even a cheat is praised for his ingenuity, Christians who make no such provision blush.” Put simply, the parable extols shrewdness and ingenuity, and urges Christians to employ them for the sake of the Kingdom. It is very much a commentary on Jesus’ statement, “Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves” (Matt. 10:16). The Greek word denotes the virtue of prudence, that virtue which “disposes practical reason to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1806).
Unfortunately, we can sometimes reject such shrewdness and prudence out of a sense of false piety, naivety, or fearfulness. Yet the Catechism, in speaking of prudence, says it “is not to be confused with timidity or fear, nor with duplicity or dissimulation.” As children of the light, we should seek to use every good and moral means available to us to build up the Kingdom of God, to proclaim the Gospel, and to defend the Catholic Faith. Yet, if we are honest, we recognize how timid and unsure we often are, especially in the face of the questions and attacks presented by the children of this world. As Craig Blomberg says “Instead of being as shrewd as serpents and as innocent as doves we become as wicked as serpents and as dumb as doves!”
In order to have and to increase prudence, we should always keep in mind Jesus’ concluding exhortation: “No servant can serve two masters.” Prudence is “right reason in action,” which means it is rooted in right priorities and the knowledge that we are not of this world, but are children of light and children of God.
Not one stroke of a letter (Luke 16:14–17)
14 The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all these things and sneered at him.
15 And he said to them, "You justify yourselves in the sight of others, but God knows your hearts; for what is of human esteem is an abomination in the sight of God".
16 "The law and the prophets lasted until John; but from then on the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone who enters does so with violence.
notes by Dan Halley (https://sfodan.wordpress.com), secular Franciscan:
Jesus Christ is the “person” of the eternal WORD made flesh for our salvation. In Jesus, God’s law is manifested in a visible way in human form. There is a divine authority in the “Old” books and words – - and in Jesus Christ. The Old Testament Laws deserve our total respect and reverence.
We are shown Jesus’ position concerning the Mosaic Law and His teaching of the enforceability to His followers. Jesus Christ is literally telling all His followers that no law given to Moses on Mount Sinai is invalid, and will not be made invalid “until heaven and earth pass away”.
Matthew reports the same notion in a little better twist:
(NAB Matthew 5:17-19) – “ 17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven”.
The “passing away” of heaven and earth in Luke account is not necessarily the end of the world as we understand. In many of our minds, we comprehend a “passing away” as the termination – - a total ending – - of the existing universe; a notion recorded in much apocalyptic literature.
Why do most people look at God’s law in a negative way, instead of in the positive way it was meant to be? Is it because these laws of God are perceived to restrict our free will?
Exactly what are God’s laws anyway? The Jewish community could refer to the “law” as being the “Ten Commandments” and those other laws found in the five Books of Moses (the Pentateuch). These “laws” explain the commandments and edicts of God – - for His “chosen” people. The “law” could also refer to the entire teachings and/or ways of life which God gave to His people – - “Traditions and Precepts”.
We have to look at the Mosaic Laws as having three separate precepts or instructions associated to them: moral, legal, and liturgical. The moral precepts of Mosaic Law still hold true in the New Testament, and in God’s kingdom. They are a specific, divine-positive, dissemination of the “natural law”. Jesus Christ, in His physically human and divine presence, gives God’s law a greater power and significance, and a further meaning and fulfillment.
We become the person we are because of those who shaped out lives. They are our parents, our teachers, our priests, and others we honor, obey, and cherish. These people gave of themselves to educate us, nurture us, and inspire us. We learned to be happy, responsible, compassionate, and secure through the examples of our caring and selfless role models.
We also can be an important influence on others by the giving of ourselves. We can inspire others to stand up and speak out against wrongs in and of society, – - to instead follow God’s (natural) law. We can help others to take charge in lives, especially when their “world” turns upside down.
The Evangelist John, in his poetically beautiful language, states the relationship about God’s law and love so well:
“Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him” (John 14:21)
God gives us the grace to love as He loves, to forgive as He forgives, and to act as He acts. The Lord Jesus Christ loves virtue, morality, and justice. He hates wickedness, dishonesty, and injustice. As His followers, His disciples, we must love His commandments, teachings, and precepts. We must abhor, detest, and find insufferable every form of sin, immorality, and unjust acts.
On divorce (Luke 16:18)
18 Everyone
who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and the one
who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.
comments by Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego:
When Jesus came, he elevated matrimony to the same status it had originally possessed between Adam and Eve—the status of a sacrament. Thus, any valid marriage between two baptized people is a sacramental marriage and, once consummated, cannot be dissolved. Jesus, therefore, taught that if anyone so married divorces and remarries, that person is living in perpetual adultery, a state of mortal sin.
In the midst of the Greco-Roman culture, which allowed for easy divorce and remarriage, the early Church Fathers proclaimed Christ’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage—just as the Catholic Church does today in our modern, secular, easy-divorce culture (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church 1614–1615). Other denominations have modified their teachings to accommodate the pro-divorce ethos that dominates modern culture, but the Catholic Church preserves the teaching of Jesus and the early Christians.
While their ex-spouses are alive, the only time that a baptized couple can remarry after divorce is when a valid sacramental marriage never existed in the first place. For example, for a marriage to be contracted, the two parties must exchange valid matrimonial consent. If they do not, the marriage is null. If the competent authority (a diocesan marriage tribunal) establishes this fact, a decree of nullity (commonly called an annulment) can be granted, and the parties are free to remarry (CCC 1629). In this case there is no divorce followed by remarriage in God’s eyes because there was no marriage before God in the first place, merely a marriage in the eyes of men.
If, however, the parties are genuinely and sacramentally married, then, while in some cases there may be good reasons for them to live apart and even to obtain a legal separation, in God’s eyes they are not free to remarry (CCC 1649).
This is not a commandment of men, but one that comes directly from Jesus Christ. As Paul said, "To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband)—and that the husband should not divorce his wife" (1 Cor. 7:10-11).
Fortunately, God will ensure that the sacramentally married have the grace necessary to live out their marriage vows and either stay married or live continently. The sacrament of matrimony itself gives this grace. Whenever we face a trial, God ensures that we will have the grace we need. As Paul elsewhere says, "No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it"
The early Church Fathers also recognized the seriousness of Christ’s teaching regarding the indissolubility of marriage.
comments by Francis Martin, president of Father Francis Martin Ministries (FFMM), commentary on the Gospel of John:
There is an interesting reading on adultery on the Gospel of John (8:1-11). Here the Gospel presents to us the episode of the adulterous woman whom Jesus saves from being condemned to death. Jesus' attitude is striking: we do not hear words of scorn, we do not hear words of condemnation, but only words of love, of mercy, which are an invitation to conversion. "Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again" (v. 11). As Pope Francis tell us, "God's face is the face of a merciful father who is always patient. Have you thought about God's patience, the patience he has with each one of us? That is his mercy. He always has patience, patience with us, he understands us, he waits for us, he does not tire of forgiving us if we are able to return to him with a contrite heart"
Jesus shows loving-kindness to a person involved in sexual immorality. Many men and women are in a similar situation today. Turning away from such sinful activity can be very difficult. The gentle mercy of Jesus, which is infinitely greater than the worst of our sins, is available to all in the sacrament of reconciliation, through which he pardons all our sins, even the most serious ones. Moreover, Christians who are not involved in such sinful behavior do well to avoid the proud self-righteousness of the woman’s accusers and instead imitate Jesus, not condemning but lovingly summoning the sinner to repent and live a better life.
comments by Edward Sri, professor of theology and Scripture:
In Matthew 19:3-12 we find another teaching from Jesus regarding divorce:
3 Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?"
4 He said in reply, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female'
5 and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate."
7 They said to him, "Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her)?"
8 He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
9 I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."
10 [His] disciples said to him, "If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry."
11 He answered, "Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted.
12 Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it."
The Catholic Church has always defended the indissolubility of Christian marriage as an exceptionless norm. In doing so, the Church upholds the authentic teaching of Jesus as handed down from the apostolic age.
Here the Pharisees appear and confront Jesus about his views on marriage and divorce. Their query is blunt and to the point: Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause? Many surmise that the Pharisees are seeking Jesus’ opinion on a disputed point of Jewish matrimonial law in order to pressure him into taking sides in a debate among the Pharisees over the legal grounds for divorce. Two schools of thought were then current in Pharisaism: some followed the conservative position of Rabbi Shammai, who allowed a man to divorce his wife only if she was guilty of sexual infidelity or immodest exposure; others followed the liberal view of Rabbi Hillel, who ruled that even something as trivial as a wife’s burning dinner constituted sufficient grounds for terminating a marriage. If indeed this rabbinic controversy is latent in the question, it sounds as though the Pharisees are asking if Jesus agrees with Hillel.
However, it seems to us that the Pharisees are asking Jesus whether divorce itself is lawful (as in the parallel passage in Mark 10:2). This interpretation better explains how Jesus is being tested by the Pharisees. he Greek verb used here often implies hostile intent; for instance, it is used elsewhere in Matthew when adversaries tempt Jesus to sin (Matthew 4:1) or wish to trap him in his speech (Matthew 22:18). It is difficult to see how chiming in on a Pharisaic debate would amount to such a test.
How, then, should we understand the test? Basically the Pharisees want to spur Jesus to contradict the Torah. The legality of divorce was universally acknowledged in Judaism because Moses had made allowance for it in the book of Deuteronomy (24:1-4). However, word was getting out that Jesus took a radical stance against this. His revolutionary claim was that divorce is opposed to the will of God, and that remarriage after divorce is tantamount to adultery (see 5:32; Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18). The Pharisees spotted an opportunity in this novel teaching to destroy Jesus’ credibility. In their view, no one who openly contradicted the teaching of Moses stood any chance at passing himself off as the Jewish messiah.
The way Jesus evades the trap is ingeniously simple. Ever one step ahead of the Pharisees, he avoids contradicting Moses by quoting Moses! Have you not read in Genesis, he replies, that God made them male and female (1:27)? One can hardly evaluate divorce without first considering God’s design for marriage. From Genesis we learn that marriage was a divine institution from the beginning. The Lord is the Creator of the marriage covenant, and it was his plan to bring couples together in the bonds of human love. So Moses teaches that God created marriage. But this is not all. Moses also teaches that God created marriage to be a permanent and lifelong partnership. This Jesus demonstrates by quoting a second passage from Genesis: For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh (2:24). Here we discover that the union of the first couple in Eden is the pristine model for all marriages. The wonderful mystery here is the one flesh union that binds husband and wife together. No doubt this includes the sexual intimacy that is proper to married life. But more is intended, such as their shared life together, their spiritual and emotional closeness, and the mutual support they offer each other as trusted friends and confidants. Besides this, ancient Israel understood that to share one flesh was to share the obligations and privileges of life in a family. In other words, marriage creates a covenantal bond of kinship that makes spouses the legal equivalent of family members sharing the same flesh and bone.
Jesus concludes that what God has joined together, no human being must separate. Just as God created the covenant of marriage in the beginning, so also he creates the covenant bond that unites husband and wife each time a marriage takes place. Of course, spouses have to give their free and mutual consent, but God does the unseen work of joining them together and making them one. The result is an unbreakable bond that no human authority has the power to dissolve.
Caught offguard, the Pharisees spring back with an obvious question: Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]? They are referring to the legislation in Deut 24:1-4, where Moses accepts divorce as a reality of life. The purpose of this law, however, was not to introduce divorce as a new legal right but to regulate it. All it says is that a couple, once divorced, cannot get married again if an intervening marriage has taken place. Jesus contends that Moses merely allowed for divorce as a concession to the hardness he perceived in his people’s hearts. Far from expressing God’s perfect plan for married life, the divorce law in Deuteronomy was an accommodation to the waywardness of Israel. In crafting this piece of legislation, Moses was lowering the level of moral expectation for a people who had shown themselves too stubborn to live by the Lord’s high standards for married life. Quite simply, it was a less than perfect law tailored to the weaknesses of a less than perfect people.
Now we come to the finale of this exchange. I say to you, Jesus states with authority and solemnity, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery. Forget about the concession in Deuteronomy. Forget about the ongoing debates of the rabbis. The definitive teacher of the Morah has just revoked the legal allowance for divorce altogether. Because the one-flesh union between husband and wife is an unbreakable union in the eyes of God, it follows that divorce and remarriage are equivalent to adultery (Exod 20:14). With these words, Jesus makes himself history’s greatest defender of the sanctity and permanence of marriage.
It remains to clarify what the parenthetical statement “unless the marriage is unlawful” is all about. The underlying expression is literally “except for sexual immorality.” Its key term is the Greek porneia, which is an umbrella term for various forms of sexual transgression, such as fornication (Mark 7:21), prostitution (1 Cor 6:13-18), adultery (Sir 23:23 LXX), and even incest (1 Cor 5:1). It takes it to mean “an incestuous union” that is unlawful because the spouses are too closely related. Couples united in an invalid marriage are not guilty of adultery when they separate and subsequently pursue a lawful marriage.
Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31)
19 There was a rich man who dressed in purple garments and fine linen and dined sumptuously each day.
20 And lying at his door was a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores,
21 who would gladly have eaten his fill of the scraps that fell from the rich man's table. Dogs even used to come and lick his sores.
22 When the poor man died, he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried,
23 and from the netherworld, where he was in torment, he raised his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
24 And he cried out, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am suffering torment in these flames.'
25 Abraham replied, 'My child, remember that you received what was good during your lifetime while Lazarus likewise received what was bad; but now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented.
26 Moreover, between us and you a great chasm is established to prevent anyone from crossing who might wish to go from our side to yours or from your side to ours.'
27 He said, 'Then I beg you, father, send him to my father's house,
28 for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they too come to this place of torment.'
29 But Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the prophets. Let them listen to them.'
30 He said, 'Oh no, father Abraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
31 Then Abraham said, 'If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone should rise from the dead.'"
The name Lazarus is also given to a second, and arguably more famous, figure in the Bible: Lazarus of Bethany, also known as Lazarus of the Four Days. He is the subject of a prominent miracle attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John, in which Jesus restores him to life four days after his death. However, the two are generally understood to be two separate characters. Many allusions to Lazarus (particularly those involving the idea of resurrection from the dead) should be understood as referring to the Lazarus described in John, rather than to the poor beggar of this story.
comments by Deacon Keith A Fournie (yourcatholicvoice.org):
The Christian life is a continuous invitation to conversion through our ongoing response to Gods’ loving invitations. Remember the “Good News” are intended to make us “good” through conversion. We meet a rich man who falls into a trap; he embraces a wrong relationship with the “goods” of the earth. Instead of growing closer to the Lord through these goods - by offering them back to the Lord who is their Source and using them to serve others, his disordered appetites blinded him. He failed to see the need of his brother Lazarus.
Notice, the Lord said nothing about the rich mans possessions themselves, but rather his use of them. He failed to recognize, let alone respond to, the need of others. Having “goods” is not the sin. It is rather a “matter of the heart”. In this story, the “goods” have the man and he is blinded, unable to see the needs of His brother. He lived for himself as if God did not exist. His sin was that he did not see Lazarus. He did not love.
St Augustine proclaimed in a homily on this same Gospel passage: “Lazarus was received into heaven because of his humility and not because of his poverty. Wealth itself was not what kept the rich man from eternal bliss. His punishment was for selfishness and disloyalty”
As Christians, followers of Jesus Christ, we are called to a different way of living, a different way of relating to the “goods” of the earth. In an age with bumper stickers that say, “Whoever dies with the most toys wins” and “I am spending my retirement spending my children’s inheritance”, we are invited to make a choice concerning our relationship with the goods of the earth. We are called, in whatever state in life we live out the Gospel vocation, to live the “way of simplicity”.
Simplicity is not about the quantity of the goods of the earth we may possess. It is about our relationship to them. Jesus said, “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matt. 6:21). The real question posed by the challenge to live lives of godly simplicity is “Do we own them or do they own us?” . In truth, God owns them all and we are His stewards.
There are two mistaken notions concerning our relationship with these “goods”, “our” possessions. These same questions emerge in every age. At the one extreme is a misguided embrace of economic poverty in the name of a spirituality that seems to maintain that wealth and material goods are somehow intrinsically evil. Although some believers are indeed called to a voluntary embrace of economic poverty as part of a specific vocation, most of us live in the material world of bills, possessions, and financial challenges and we are to learn how to receive and to use the “goods” of the earth, including money and material possessions.
Wealth and possessions are not evil. We are given them by the God who loves us. We are to receive them with gratitude and use them with gratitude and freedom in the Lord.
Matter is not evil. How can it be so when Jesus’ earthly body was formed of matter? To think that it is often reveals that we misunderstand His incarnation and the resurrection of the body, which will take place in a new heaven and a new earth. The beloved disciple John in his first letter writes: “We have come to know and to believe in the love God has for us. God is love, and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him. In this is love brought to perfection among us, that we have confidence on the Day of Judgment because as He is, so are we in this world.” (I John 4:17,18)
Our relationship to this world - and the goods of this world- should mirror that of God’s Son whom we follow. One of the great theologians of the twentieth century, Hans Urs Von Balthasar, wrote of the relationship with matter, in these profound words: "In Jesus Christ, God has engraved his name upon matter; he has inscribed it so deeply that it cannot be erased, for matter took him into its innermost self.”
The other error, found in its most extreme contemporary manifestation in what has been labeled the so-called “prosperity gospel” , equates God’s favor with economic wealth. It is based upon a false equation that the more money we possess, the more spiritual power we have, and the more we can see that God favors us. Many of the Jews of Jesus’ day believed that God’s favor guaranteed wealth and prosperity.
But Jesus’ life told a very different story. He was born in a manger. As an adult he had “no place to lay his head.” He was raised in a simple home- by a woman whose heart recognized true wealth. Remember the words that the angel spoke to Mary when she asked how it could be that she would bear the Messiah. “Nothing is impossible with God” (Luke 1:37) Mary understood that when you have the Lord, you have it all. She lived in the heavenly economy, and if we choose, we can live there too. That is the way of simplicity.
In rediscovering our proper relationship to the goods of the earth—neither utterly rejecting them, wholeheartedly craving them, or turning them into an idol—we will find true freedom in Jesus Christ. Our eyes will be opened. We will not only learn to see Lazarus, we will see Jesus in Lazarus. Remember these sobering words from the twenty fifth chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew: “'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25: 37-40)
The Lord has given us His word as food. He has also given us examples of His word, lived out. There is no greater example than His mother, who walked the way of simplicity and surrendered love. In her wonderful song, her Magnificat, she proclaimed the joy of every disciple who recognizes that when we have Jesus Christ, we have everything.
“He Has Filled The Hungry With Good Things, And The Rich He Has Sent Empty Away.”
Choosing to live in simplicity helps us to find freedom from materialistic idolatry and clears the way for us to more fully participate in the redemptive work of the One who still “fills the hungry with good things.” Money is not evil. Nor is it “proof” of God’s blessing and favor—a view that insults Christians who struggle daily to survive. Both errors fall short of the truth and are rooted in a mistaken foundation. They are self-centered rather than God and others centered.
The Apostle Paul wrote two letters to Timothy, a young disciple who had been placed in leadership over the Christian community at Ephesus, a city that was known for its wealth and luxury. St. Paul had traveled there to plant the nascent Christian Church and he knew that those new Christian believers would face certain dangers when dealing with wealth. He reminded Timothy:
“Indeed, religion with contentment is a great gain; for we brought nothing into the world, just as we shall not be able to take anything out of it. If we have food and clothing, we shall be content with that. Those who want to be rich are falling into temptation and into a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge them into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is the root of all evils, and some people in their desire for it have strayed from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains. But you, man of God, avoid all this. Instead, pursue righteousness, devotion, faith, love, patience, and gentleness.” (1 Tim. 6: 6-11)
How often have we have heard the saying, “Money is the root of all evil”? That is not what the Apostle taught. The phrase “love of money” is important because it speaks to matters of the heart. When we love the “goods” of the earth more than the One who created them, we commit the sin of idolatry. A destitute person can be just as obsessed with money as a wealthy one who is given over to greed. Mary helps us to see that a life of simplicity is the antidote to any disordered view of earthly goods.
In another one of his letters, to the Christians in Philippi, St Paul further explains his own approach to material things: “I know indeed how to live in humble circumstances; I know also how to live with abundance. In every circumstance and in all things I have learned the secret of being well fed and of going hungry, of living in abundance and of being in need” (Philippians 4:12).
When we begin to recognize our own poverty of spirit; we are able to live lives that are completely dependent upon Jesus, who is the Bread of Life. Only He can satisfy the hunger of the human heart. Only He can occupy the place within us that is to be reserved for worship and complete devotion. When we have Him, we have everything; even though we may possess nothing.
When we come to see that everything in our lives is a gift to be given back to the Giver, we begin to understand the way of simplicity. Only then can the goods of the earth be fully entrusted to us by the Lord who is their Source. Only then do we discover the secret of heaven’s economy: those who live in simplicity are the richest people on the earth. Jesus called them the “poor in spirit.” He promised them blessedness. He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven belongs to them (Matt 5:3).
Let us hear the “Good news” and live it out by walking the way of simplicity.
comments by Pope Benedict XVI (JN):
The Lord is using this story in order to initiate us into the very process of “awakening” that is reflected in the Psalms. This has nothing to do with a cheap condemnation of riches and of the rich begotten of envy. The main point is the rich man’s request for a sign.The rich man, looking up to Abraham from Hades, says what so many people, both then and now, say or would like to say to God: “If you really want us to believe in you and organize our lives in accord with the revealed word of the Bible, you’ll have to make yourself clearer. Send us someone from the next world who can tell us that it is really so.” The demand for signs, the demand for more evidence of Revelation, is an issue that runs through the entire Gospel.
Abraham’s answer—like Jesus’ answer to his contemporaries’ demand for signs in other contexts—is clear: If people do not believe the word of Scripture, then they will not believe someone coming from the next world either. The highest truths cannot be forced into the type of empirical evidence that only applies to material reality. Abraham cannot send Lazarus to the rich man’s father’s house. But at this point something strikes us. We are reminded of the resurrection of Lazarus of Bethany, recounted to us in John’s Gospel. What happens there? The Evangelist tells us, “Many of the Jews…believed in him” (Jn 11:45). They go to the Pharisees and report on what has happened, whereupon the Sanhedrin gathers to take counsel. They see the affair in a political light: If this leads to a popular movement, it might force the Romans to intervene, leading to a dangerous situation. So they decide to kill Jesus. The miracle leads not to faith, but to hardening of hearts (Jn 11:45–53).
But our thoughts go even further. Do we not recognize in the figure of Lazarus—lying at the rich man’s door covered in sores—the mystery of Jesus, who “suffered outside the city walls” (Heb 13:12) and, stretched naked on the Cross, was delivered over to the mockery and contempt of the mob, his body “full of blood and wounds”? “But I am a worm, and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people” (Ps 22:7).
He, the true Lazarus, has risen from the dead—and he has come to tell us so. If we see in the story of Lazarus Jesus’ answer to his generation’s demand for a sign, we find ourselves in harmony with the principal answer that Jesus gave to that demand. In Matthew, it reads thus: “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the Prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Mt 12:39f.). In Luke we read: “This generation is an evil generation; it seeks a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh, so will the Son of man be to this generation” (Lk 11:29f.).
We do not need to analyze here the differences between these two versions. One thing is clear: God’s sign for men is the Son of Man; it is Jesus himself. And at the deepest level, he is this sign in his Paschal Mystery, in the mystery of his death and Resurrection. He himself is “the sign of Jonah.” He, crucified and risen, is the true Lazarus. The parable is inviting us to believe and follow him, God’s great sign. But it is more than a parable. It speaks of reality, of the most decisive reality in all history.
 |
| Marinus van Reymerswaele - The parable of the unjust steward (1540) |
2 He summoned him and said, 'What is this I hear about you? Prepare a full account of your stewardship, because you can no longer be my steward.'
3 The steward said to himself, 'What shall I do, now that my master is taking the position of steward away from me? I am not strong enough to dig and I am ashamed to beg.
4 I know what I shall do so that, when I am removed from the stewardship, they may welcome me into their homes.'
5 He called in his master's debtors one by one. To the first he said, 'How much do you owe my master?'
6 He replied, 'One hundred measures of olive oil.' He said to him, 'Here is your promissory note. Sit down and quickly write one for fifty.'
7 Then to another he said, 'And you, how much do you owe?' He replied, 'One hundred kors of wheat.' He said to him, 'Here is your promissory note; write one for eighty.'
8 And the master commended that dishonest steward for acting prudently. "For the children of this world are more prudent in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.
9 I tell you, make friends for yourselves with dishonest wealth, so that when it fails, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings.
10 The person who is trustworthy in very small matters is also trustworthy in great ones; and the person who is dishonest in very small matters is also dishonest in great ones.
11 If, therefore, you are not trustworthy with dishonest wealth, who will trust you with true wealth?
12 If you are not trustworthy with what belongs to another, who will give you what is yours?
13 No servant can serve two masters. He will either hate one and love the other, or be devoted to one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon."
The parable of the dishonest steward has to be understood in the light of the Palestinian custom of agents acting on behalf of their masters and the usurious practices common to such agents. The dishonesty of the steward consisted in the squandering of his master's property (Luke 16:1) and not in any subsequent graft. The master commends the dishonest steward who has forgone his own usurious commission on the business transaction by having the debtors write new notes that reflected only the real amount owed the master (i.e., minus the steward's profit). The dishonest steward acts in this way in order to ingratiate himself with the debtors because he knows he is being dismissed from his position (Luke 16:3). The parable, then, teaches the prudent use of one's material goods in light of an imminent crisis.
comments by Carl E. Olson (Editor Catholic World Report):
This is the most puzzling of the parables. The parable has a similar structure to the parable of the unforgiving, or ungrateful, steward (Matt 18:23-35; Lk. 7:41-43), with three levels of social status: the master, the steward, and the debtors. But whereas the parable of the unforgiving steward is straightforward in its moral message—if you wish to receive forgiveness, you must extend forgiveness—the moral and message of the parable of the dishonest steward is not immediately clear.
First, the steward, who has misused his master’s money and so faces the loss of job and status, uses dishonest means in order to open doors for future prospects. He doesn’t admit his guilt, ask for forgiveness, or attempt to make matters right. Secondly, having changed the amounts due on the promissory notes (and thus ingratiating himself to the debtors), the steward is—shockingly—commended by his master. Why? Because he had, Jesus said, acted prudently.
At this point, many readers might understandably move from being puzzled to being perplexed. It seems that Jesus not only presented a parable condoning dishonest and self-serving behavior, but had actually praised it! But St. Augustine, in preaching upon this parable, stated that Jesus “surely did not approve of that cheat of a servant who cheated his master, stole from him and did not make it up from his own pocket.” So why, he asked, “did the Lord put this before us”? We must be careful to not miss what Jesus indicated was a key point of the parable: “For the children of this world are more prudent in dealing with their own generation than are the children of light.”
And, in fact, Augustine writes that the parable is not meant to praise the sins of the steward but to extol him “because he exercised foresight for the future. When even a cheat is praised for his ingenuity, Christians who make no such provision blush.” Put simply, the parable extols shrewdness and ingenuity, and urges Christians to employ them for the sake of the Kingdom. It is very much a commentary on Jesus’ statement, “Behold, I am sending you like sheep in the midst of wolves; so be shrewd as serpents and simple as doves” (Matt. 10:16). The Greek word denotes the virtue of prudence, that virtue which “disposes practical reason to discern our true good in every circumstance and to choose the right means of achieving it” (Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1806).
Unfortunately, we can sometimes reject such shrewdness and prudence out of a sense of false piety, naivety, or fearfulness. Yet the Catechism, in speaking of prudence, says it “is not to be confused with timidity or fear, nor with duplicity or dissimulation.” As children of the light, we should seek to use every good and moral means available to us to build up the Kingdom of God, to proclaim the Gospel, and to defend the Catholic Faith. Yet, if we are honest, we recognize how timid and unsure we often are, especially in the face of the questions and attacks presented by the children of this world. As Craig Blomberg says “Instead of being as shrewd as serpents and as innocent as doves we become as wicked as serpents and as dumb as doves!”
In order to have and to increase prudence, we should always keep in mind Jesus’ concluding exhortation: “No servant can serve two masters.” Prudence is “right reason in action,” which means it is rooted in right priorities and the knowledge that we are not of this world, but are children of light and children of God.
Not one stroke of a letter (Luke 16:14–17)
 |
| Rembrandt - Moses Smashing the Tablets of the Law (1659) |
15 And he said to them, "You justify yourselves in the sight of others, but God knows your hearts; for what is of human esteem is an abomination in the sight of God".
16 "The law and the prophets lasted until John; but from then on the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone who enters does so with violence.
17 It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away
than for the smallest part of a letter of the law to become invalid".
notes by Dan Halley (https://sfodan.wordpress.com), secular Franciscan:
Jesus Christ is the “person” of the eternal WORD made flesh for our salvation. In Jesus, God’s law is manifested in a visible way in human form. There is a divine authority in the “Old” books and words – - and in Jesus Christ. The Old Testament Laws deserve our total respect and reverence.
We are shown Jesus’ position concerning the Mosaic Law and His teaching of the enforceability to His followers. Jesus Christ is literally telling all His followers that no law given to Moses on Mount Sinai is invalid, and will not be made invalid “until heaven and earth pass away”.
Matthew reports the same notion in a little better twist:
(NAB Matthew 5:17-19) – “ 17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets. I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. 18 Amen, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or the smallest part of a letter will pass from the law, until all things have taken place. 19 Therefore, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do so will be called least in the kingdom of heaven. But whoever obeys and teaches these commandments will be called greatest in the kingdom of heaven”.
The “passing away” of heaven and earth in Luke account is not necessarily the end of the world as we understand. In many of our minds, we comprehend a “passing away” as the termination – - a total ending – - of the existing universe; a notion recorded in much apocalyptic literature.
Why do most people look at God’s law in a negative way, instead of in the positive way it was meant to be? Is it because these laws of God are perceived to restrict our free will?
Exactly what are God’s laws anyway? The Jewish community could refer to the “law” as being the “Ten Commandments” and those other laws found in the five Books of Moses (the Pentateuch). These “laws” explain the commandments and edicts of God – - for His “chosen” people. The “law” could also refer to the entire teachings and/or ways of life which God gave to His people – - “Traditions and Precepts”.
We have to look at the Mosaic Laws as having three separate precepts or instructions associated to them: moral, legal, and liturgical. The moral precepts of Mosaic Law still hold true in the New Testament, and in God’s kingdom. They are a specific, divine-positive, dissemination of the “natural law”. Jesus Christ, in His physically human and divine presence, gives God’s law a greater power and significance, and a further meaning and fulfillment.
We become the person we are because of those who shaped out lives. They are our parents, our teachers, our priests, and others we honor, obey, and cherish. These people gave of themselves to educate us, nurture us, and inspire us. We learned to be happy, responsible, compassionate, and secure through the examples of our caring and selfless role models.
We also can be an important influence on others by the giving of ourselves. We can inspire others to stand up and speak out against wrongs in and of society, – - to instead follow God’s (natural) law. We can help others to take charge in lives, especially when their “world” turns upside down.
The Evangelist John, in his poetically beautiful language, states the relationship about God’s law and love so well:
“Whoever has my commandments and observes them is the one who loves me. And whoever loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and reveal myself to him” (John 14:21)
God gives us the grace to love as He loves, to forgive as He forgives, and to act as He acts. The Lord Jesus Christ loves virtue, morality, and justice. He hates wickedness, dishonesty, and injustice. As His followers, His disciples, we must love His commandments, teachings, and precepts. We must abhor, detest, and find insufferable every form of sin, immorality, and unjust acts.
On divorce (Luke 16:18)
 |
| The Arnolfini Portrait (1434) by Jan van Eyck |
comments by Robert H. Brom, Bishop of San Diego:
When Jesus came, he elevated matrimony to the same status it had originally possessed between Adam and Eve—the status of a sacrament. Thus, any valid marriage between two baptized people is a sacramental marriage and, once consummated, cannot be dissolved. Jesus, therefore, taught that if anyone so married divorces and remarries, that person is living in perpetual adultery, a state of mortal sin.
In the midst of the Greco-Roman culture, which allowed for easy divorce and remarriage, the early Church Fathers proclaimed Christ’s teaching on the indissolubility of marriage—just as the Catholic Church does today in our modern, secular, easy-divorce culture (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church 1614–1615). Other denominations have modified their teachings to accommodate the pro-divorce ethos that dominates modern culture, but the Catholic Church preserves the teaching of Jesus and the early Christians.
While their ex-spouses are alive, the only time that a baptized couple can remarry after divorce is when a valid sacramental marriage never existed in the first place. For example, for a marriage to be contracted, the two parties must exchange valid matrimonial consent. If they do not, the marriage is null. If the competent authority (a diocesan marriage tribunal) establishes this fact, a decree of nullity (commonly called an annulment) can be granted, and the parties are free to remarry (CCC 1629). In this case there is no divorce followed by remarriage in God’s eyes because there was no marriage before God in the first place, merely a marriage in the eyes of men.
If, however, the parties are genuinely and sacramentally married, then, while in some cases there may be good reasons for them to live apart and even to obtain a legal separation, in God’s eyes they are not free to remarry (CCC 1649).
This is not a commandment of men, but one that comes directly from Jesus Christ. As Paul said, "To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband (but if she does, let her remain single or else be reconciled to her husband)—and that the husband should not divorce his wife" (1 Cor. 7:10-11).
Fortunately, God will ensure that the sacramentally married have the grace necessary to live out their marriage vows and either stay married or live continently. The sacrament of matrimony itself gives this grace. Whenever we face a trial, God ensures that we will have the grace we need. As Paul elsewhere says, "No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it"
The early Church Fathers also recognized the seriousness of Christ’s teaching regarding the indissolubility of marriage.
comments by Francis Martin, president of Father Francis Martin Ministries (FFMM), commentary on the Gospel of John:
There is an interesting reading on adultery on the Gospel of John (8:1-11). Here the Gospel presents to us the episode of the adulterous woman whom Jesus saves from being condemned to death. Jesus' attitude is striking: we do not hear words of scorn, we do not hear words of condemnation, but only words of love, of mercy, which are an invitation to conversion. "Neither do I condemn you; go, and do not sin again" (v. 11). As Pope Francis tell us, "God's face is the face of a merciful father who is always patient. Have you thought about God's patience, the patience he has with each one of us? That is his mercy. He always has patience, patience with us, he understands us, he waits for us, he does not tire of forgiving us if we are able to return to him with a contrite heart"
Jesus shows loving-kindness to a person involved in sexual immorality. Many men and women are in a similar situation today. Turning away from such sinful activity can be very difficult. The gentle mercy of Jesus, which is infinitely greater than the worst of our sins, is available to all in the sacrament of reconciliation, through which he pardons all our sins, even the most serious ones. Moreover, Christians who are not involved in such sinful behavior do well to avoid the proud self-righteousness of the woman’s accusers and instead imitate Jesus, not condemning but lovingly summoning the sinner to repent and live a better life.
comments by Edward Sri, professor of theology and Scripture:
In Matthew 19:3-12 we find another teaching from Jesus regarding divorce:
3 Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?"
4 He said in reply, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female'
5 and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?
6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate."
7 They said to him, "Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss (her)?"
8 He said to them, "Because of the hardness of your hearts Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.
9 I say to you, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery."
10 [His] disciples said to him, "If that is the case of a man with his wife, it is better not to marry."
11 He answered, "Not all can accept [this] word, but only those to whom that is granted.
12 Some are incapable of marriage because they were born so; some, because they were made so by others; some, because they have renounced marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. Whoever can accept this ought to accept it."
The Catholic Church has always defended the indissolubility of Christian marriage as an exceptionless norm. In doing so, the Church upholds the authentic teaching of Jesus as handed down from the apostolic age.
Here the Pharisees appear and confront Jesus about his views on marriage and divorce. Their query is blunt and to the point: Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause? Many surmise that the Pharisees are seeking Jesus’ opinion on a disputed point of Jewish matrimonial law in order to pressure him into taking sides in a debate among the Pharisees over the legal grounds for divorce. Two schools of thought were then current in Pharisaism: some followed the conservative position of Rabbi Shammai, who allowed a man to divorce his wife only if she was guilty of sexual infidelity or immodest exposure; others followed the liberal view of Rabbi Hillel, who ruled that even something as trivial as a wife’s burning dinner constituted sufficient grounds for terminating a marriage. If indeed this rabbinic controversy is latent in the question, it sounds as though the Pharisees are asking if Jesus agrees with Hillel.
However, it seems to us that the Pharisees are asking Jesus whether divorce itself is lawful (as in the parallel passage in Mark 10:2). This interpretation better explains how Jesus is being tested by the Pharisees. he Greek verb used here often implies hostile intent; for instance, it is used elsewhere in Matthew when adversaries tempt Jesus to sin (Matthew 4:1) or wish to trap him in his speech (Matthew 22:18). It is difficult to see how chiming in on a Pharisaic debate would amount to such a test.
How, then, should we understand the test? Basically the Pharisees want to spur Jesus to contradict the Torah. The legality of divorce was universally acknowledged in Judaism because Moses had made allowance for it in the book of Deuteronomy (24:1-4). However, word was getting out that Jesus took a radical stance against this. His revolutionary claim was that divorce is opposed to the will of God, and that remarriage after divorce is tantamount to adultery (see 5:32; Mark 10:11-12; Luke 16:18). The Pharisees spotted an opportunity in this novel teaching to destroy Jesus’ credibility. In their view, no one who openly contradicted the teaching of Moses stood any chance at passing himself off as the Jewish messiah.
The way Jesus evades the trap is ingeniously simple. Ever one step ahead of the Pharisees, he avoids contradicting Moses by quoting Moses! Have you not read in Genesis, he replies, that God made them male and female (1:27)? One can hardly evaluate divorce without first considering God’s design for marriage. From Genesis we learn that marriage was a divine institution from the beginning. The Lord is the Creator of the marriage covenant, and it was his plan to bring couples together in the bonds of human love. So Moses teaches that God created marriage. But this is not all. Moses also teaches that God created marriage to be a permanent and lifelong partnership. This Jesus demonstrates by quoting a second passage from Genesis: For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh (2:24). Here we discover that the union of the first couple in Eden is the pristine model for all marriages. The wonderful mystery here is the one flesh union that binds husband and wife together. No doubt this includes the sexual intimacy that is proper to married life. But more is intended, such as their shared life together, their spiritual and emotional closeness, and the mutual support they offer each other as trusted friends and confidants. Besides this, ancient Israel understood that to share one flesh was to share the obligations and privileges of life in a family. In other words, marriage creates a covenantal bond of kinship that makes spouses the legal equivalent of family members sharing the same flesh and bone.
Jesus concludes that what God has joined together, no human being must separate. Just as God created the covenant of marriage in the beginning, so also he creates the covenant bond that unites husband and wife each time a marriage takes place. Of course, spouses have to give their free and mutual consent, but God does the unseen work of joining them together and making them one. The result is an unbreakable bond that no human authority has the power to dissolve.
Caught offguard, the Pharisees spring back with an obvious question: Then why did Moses command that the man give the woman a bill of divorce and dismiss [her]? They are referring to the legislation in Deut 24:1-4, where Moses accepts divorce as a reality of life. The purpose of this law, however, was not to introduce divorce as a new legal right but to regulate it. All it says is that a couple, once divorced, cannot get married again if an intervening marriage has taken place. Jesus contends that Moses merely allowed for divorce as a concession to the hardness he perceived in his people’s hearts. Far from expressing God’s perfect plan for married life, the divorce law in Deuteronomy was an accommodation to the waywardness of Israel. In crafting this piece of legislation, Moses was lowering the level of moral expectation for a people who had shown themselves too stubborn to live by the Lord’s high standards for married life. Quite simply, it was a less than perfect law tailored to the weaknesses of a less than perfect people.
Now we come to the finale of this exchange. I say to you, Jesus states with authority and solemnity, whoever divorces his wife (unless the marriage is unlawful) and marries another commits adultery. Forget about the concession in Deuteronomy. Forget about the ongoing debates of the rabbis. The definitive teacher of the Morah has just revoked the legal allowance for divorce altogether. Because the one-flesh union between husband and wife is an unbreakable union in the eyes of God, it follows that divorce and remarriage are equivalent to adultery (Exod 20:14). With these words, Jesus makes himself history’s greatest defender of the sanctity and permanence of marriage.
It remains to clarify what the parenthetical statement “unless the marriage is unlawful” is all about. The underlying expression is literally “except for sexual immorality.” Its key term is the Greek porneia, which is an umbrella term for various forms of sexual transgression, such as fornication (Mark 7:21), prostitution (1 Cor 6:13-18), adultery (Sir 23:23 LXX), and even incest (1 Cor 5:1). It takes it to mean “an incestuous union” that is unlawful because the spouses are too closely related. Couples united in an invalid marriage are not guilty of adultery when they separate and subsequently pursue a lawful marriage.
Rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31)
 |
| Bas-relief of the story of the rich man and Lazarus: Abbaye St. Pierre de Moissac (Two dogs lick Lazarus' wounds; the rich man dines to the right |
20 And lying at his door was a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores,
21 who would gladly have eaten his fill of the scraps that fell from the rich man's table. Dogs even used to come and lick his sores.
22 When the poor man died, he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham. The rich man also died and was buried,
23 and from the netherworld, where he was in torment, he raised his eyes and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus at his side.
24 And he cried out, 'Father Abraham, have pity on me. Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am suffering torment in these flames.'
25 Abraham replied, 'My child, remember that you received what was good during your lifetime while Lazarus likewise received what was bad; but now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented.
26 Moreover, between us and you a great chasm is established to prevent anyone from crossing who might wish to go from our side to yours or from your side to ours.'
27 He said, 'Then I beg you, father, send him to my father's house,
28 for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they too come to this place of torment.'
29 But Abraham replied, 'They have Moses and the prophets. Let them listen to them.'
30 He said, 'Oh no, father Abraham, but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.'
31 Then Abraham said, 'If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded if someone should rise from the dead.'"
The name Lazarus is also given to a second, and arguably more famous, figure in the Bible: Lazarus of Bethany, also known as Lazarus of the Four Days. He is the subject of a prominent miracle attributed to Jesus in the Gospel of John, in which Jesus restores him to life four days after his death. However, the two are generally understood to be two separate characters. Many allusions to Lazarus (particularly those involving the idea of resurrection from the dead) should be understood as referring to the Lazarus described in John, rather than to the poor beggar of this story.
comments by Deacon Keith A Fournie (yourcatholicvoice.org):
The Christian life is a continuous invitation to conversion through our ongoing response to Gods’ loving invitations. Remember the “Good News” are intended to make us “good” through conversion. We meet a rich man who falls into a trap; he embraces a wrong relationship with the “goods” of the earth. Instead of growing closer to the Lord through these goods - by offering them back to the Lord who is their Source and using them to serve others, his disordered appetites blinded him. He failed to see the need of his brother Lazarus.
Notice, the Lord said nothing about the rich mans possessions themselves, but rather his use of them. He failed to recognize, let alone respond to, the need of others. Having “goods” is not the sin. It is rather a “matter of the heart”. In this story, the “goods” have the man and he is blinded, unable to see the needs of His brother. He lived for himself as if God did not exist. His sin was that he did not see Lazarus. He did not love.
St Augustine proclaimed in a homily on this same Gospel passage: “Lazarus was received into heaven because of his humility and not because of his poverty. Wealth itself was not what kept the rich man from eternal bliss. His punishment was for selfishness and disloyalty”
As Christians, followers of Jesus Christ, we are called to a different way of living, a different way of relating to the “goods” of the earth. In an age with bumper stickers that say, “Whoever dies with the most toys wins” and “I am spending my retirement spending my children’s inheritance”, we are invited to make a choice concerning our relationship with the goods of the earth. We are called, in whatever state in life we live out the Gospel vocation, to live the “way of simplicity”.
Simplicity is not about the quantity of the goods of the earth we may possess. It is about our relationship to them. Jesus said, “Where your treasure is, there your heart will be also” (Matt. 6:21). The real question posed by the challenge to live lives of godly simplicity is “Do we own them or do they own us?” . In truth, God owns them all and we are His stewards.
There are two mistaken notions concerning our relationship with these “goods”, “our” possessions. These same questions emerge in every age. At the one extreme is a misguided embrace of economic poverty in the name of a spirituality that seems to maintain that wealth and material goods are somehow intrinsically evil. Although some believers are indeed called to a voluntary embrace of economic poverty as part of a specific vocation, most of us live in the material world of bills, possessions, and financial challenges and we are to learn how to receive and to use the “goods” of the earth, including money and material possessions.
Wealth and possessions are not evil. We are given them by the God who loves us. We are to receive them with gratitude and use them with gratitude and freedom in the Lord.
Matter is not evil. How can it be so when Jesus’ earthly body was formed of matter? To think that it is often reveals that we misunderstand His incarnation and the resurrection of the body, which will take place in a new heaven and a new earth. The beloved disciple John in his first letter writes: “We have come to know and to believe in the love God has for us. God is love, and whoever remains in love remains in God and God in him. In this is love brought to perfection among us, that we have confidence on the Day of Judgment because as He is, so are we in this world.” (I John 4:17,18)
Our relationship to this world - and the goods of this world- should mirror that of God’s Son whom we follow. One of the great theologians of the twentieth century, Hans Urs Von Balthasar, wrote of the relationship with matter, in these profound words: "In Jesus Christ, God has engraved his name upon matter; he has inscribed it so deeply that it cannot be erased, for matter took him into its innermost self.”
The other error, found in its most extreme contemporary manifestation in what has been labeled the so-called “prosperity gospel” , equates God’s favor with economic wealth. It is based upon a false equation that the more money we possess, the more spiritual power we have, and the more we can see that God favors us. Many of the Jews of Jesus’ day believed that God’s favor guaranteed wealth and prosperity.
But Jesus’ life told a very different story. He was born in a manger. As an adult he had “no place to lay his head.” He was raised in a simple home- by a woman whose heart recognized true wealth. Remember the words that the angel spoke to Mary when she asked how it could be that she would bear the Messiah. “Nothing is impossible with God” (Luke 1:37) Mary understood that when you have the Lord, you have it all. She lived in the heavenly economy, and if we choose, we can live there too. That is the way of simplicity.
In rediscovering our proper relationship to the goods of the earth—neither utterly rejecting them, wholeheartedly craving them, or turning them into an idol—we will find true freedom in Jesus Christ. Our eyes will be opened. We will not only learn to see Lazarus, we will see Jesus in Lazarus. Remember these sobering words from the twenty fifth chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew: “'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?' And the king will say to them in reply, 'Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.” (Matthew 25: 37-40)
The Lord has given us His word as food. He has also given us examples of His word, lived out. There is no greater example than His mother, who walked the way of simplicity and surrendered love. In her wonderful song, her Magnificat, she proclaimed the joy of every disciple who recognizes that when we have Jesus Christ, we have everything.
“He Has Filled The Hungry With Good Things, And The Rich He Has Sent Empty Away.”
Choosing to live in simplicity helps us to find freedom from materialistic idolatry and clears the way for us to more fully participate in the redemptive work of the One who still “fills the hungry with good things.” Money is not evil. Nor is it “proof” of God’s blessing and favor—a view that insults Christians who struggle daily to survive. Both errors fall short of the truth and are rooted in a mistaken foundation. They are self-centered rather than God and others centered.
The Apostle Paul wrote two letters to Timothy, a young disciple who had been placed in leadership over the Christian community at Ephesus, a city that was known for its wealth and luxury. St. Paul had traveled there to plant the nascent Christian Church and he knew that those new Christian believers would face certain dangers when dealing with wealth. He reminded Timothy:
“Indeed, religion with contentment is a great gain; for we brought nothing into the world, just as we shall not be able to take anything out of it. If we have food and clothing, we shall be content with that. Those who want to be rich are falling into temptation and into a trap and into many foolish and harmful desires, which plunge them into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is the root of all evils, and some people in their desire for it have strayed from the faith and have pierced themselves with many pains. But you, man of God, avoid all this. Instead, pursue righteousness, devotion, faith, love, patience, and gentleness.” (1 Tim. 6: 6-11)
How often have we have heard the saying, “Money is the root of all evil”? That is not what the Apostle taught. The phrase “love of money” is important because it speaks to matters of the heart. When we love the “goods” of the earth more than the One who created them, we commit the sin of idolatry. A destitute person can be just as obsessed with money as a wealthy one who is given over to greed. Mary helps us to see that a life of simplicity is the antidote to any disordered view of earthly goods.
In another one of his letters, to the Christians in Philippi, St Paul further explains his own approach to material things: “I know indeed how to live in humble circumstances; I know also how to live with abundance. In every circumstance and in all things I have learned the secret of being well fed and of going hungry, of living in abundance and of being in need” (Philippians 4:12).
When we begin to recognize our own poverty of spirit; we are able to live lives that are completely dependent upon Jesus, who is the Bread of Life. Only He can satisfy the hunger of the human heart. Only He can occupy the place within us that is to be reserved for worship and complete devotion. When we have Him, we have everything; even though we may possess nothing.
When we come to see that everything in our lives is a gift to be given back to the Giver, we begin to understand the way of simplicity. Only then can the goods of the earth be fully entrusted to us by the Lord who is their Source. Only then do we discover the secret of heaven’s economy: those who live in simplicity are the richest people on the earth. Jesus called them the “poor in spirit.” He promised them blessedness. He proclaimed that the kingdom of heaven belongs to them (Matt 5:3).
Let us hear the “Good news” and live it out by walking the way of simplicity.
comments by Pope Benedict XVI (JN):
The Lord is using this story in order to initiate us into the very process of “awakening” that is reflected in the Psalms. This has nothing to do with a cheap condemnation of riches and of the rich begotten of envy. The main point is the rich man’s request for a sign.The rich man, looking up to Abraham from Hades, says what so many people, both then and now, say or would like to say to God: “If you really want us to believe in you and organize our lives in accord with the revealed word of the Bible, you’ll have to make yourself clearer. Send us someone from the next world who can tell us that it is really so.” The demand for signs, the demand for more evidence of Revelation, is an issue that runs through the entire Gospel.
Abraham’s answer—like Jesus’ answer to his contemporaries’ demand for signs in other contexts—is clear: If people do not believe the word of Scripture, then they will not believe someone coming from the next world either. The highest truths cannot be forced into the type of empirical evidence that only applies to material reality. Abraham cannot send Lazarus to the rich man’s father’s house. But at this point something strikes us. We are reminded of the resurrection of Lazarus of Bethany, recounted to us in John’s Gospel. What happens there? The Evangelist tells us, “Many of the Jews…believed in him” (Jn 11:45). They go to the Pharisees and report on what has happened, whereupon the Sanhedrin gathers to take counsel. They see the affair in a political light: If this leads to a popular movement, it might force the Romans to intervene, leading to a dangerous situation. So they decide to kill Jesus. The miracle leads not to faith, but to hardening of hearts (Jn 11:45–53).
But our thoughts go even further. Do we not recognize in the figure of Lazarus—lying at the rich man’s door covered in sores—the mystery of Jesus, who “suffered outside the city walls” (Heb 13:12) and, stretched naked on the Cross, was delivered over to the mockery and contempt of the mob, his body “full of blood and wounds”? “But I am a worm, and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people” (Ps 22:7).
He, the true Lazarus, has risen from the dead—and he has come to tell us so. If we see in the story of Lazarus Jesus’ answer to his generation’s demand for a sign, we find ourselves in harmony with the principal answer that Jesus gave to that demand. In Matthew, it reads thus: “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the Prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth” (Mt 12:39f.). In Luke we read: “This generation is an evil generation; it seeks a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh, so will the Son of man be to this generation” (Lk 11:29f.).
We do not need to analyze here the differences between these two versions. One thing is clear: God’s sign for men is the Son of Man; it is Jesus himself. And at the deepest level, he is this sign in his Paschal Mystery, in the mystery of his death and Resurrection. He himself is “the sign of Jonah.” He, crucified and risen, is the true Lazarus. The parable is inviting us to believe and follow him, God’s great sign. But it is more than a parable. It speaks of reality, of the most decisive reality in all history.
No comments:
Post a Comment