To read the texts click on the texts: Mic 7:14-15, 18-20; Lk 15;1-3, 11-32
The setting for the Parable of the Prodigal son
(more correctly called “The Prodigal father”) is the same as at the beginning
of Chapter 15 and concerns the murmuring of the Pharisees and scribes because
Jesus eats with “tax collectors and sinners.”
Direct taxes (poll tax, land tax) were collected by
tax collectors employed by the Romans, while tolls, tariffs, and customs fees
were collected at toll houses by toll collectors, the group that appears
frequently in the Gospels and is not entirely accurately identified as “tax
collectors.” Toll collectors paid in advance for the right to collect tolls, so
the system was open to abuse and corruption. The toll collectors were often not
natives of the area where they worked, and their wealth and collusion with the
Roman oppressors made them targets of scorn.
Those designated as “sinners” by the Pharisees would
have included not only persons who broke the moral laws but also those who did
not maintain the ritual purity practiced by the Pharisees. The scandal was that
Jesus received such outcasts, shared table fellowship with them, and even
played host to them.
The beginning of the Parable which speaks of “two
sons” indicates that the focus is on
their relationship to the Father
and not to each other as “brothers”.
The demand of the younger son is disrespectful and irregular. There is
no rationale here. He was breaking family ties and treating his father as if he
were already dead. The father divides his life among them. As soon as the younger son receives his share,
there is a progressive estrangement. He goes into a far away country which
indicates gentile land and mismanages the money given to him. He spends it all
on loose living. His descent into poverty and deprivation is swift. He descends
as low as to agree to work for a gentile and in a gentile land. Swine were an
abomination to Jews, and they were prohibited from raising swine anywhere. The
man who would dare to breed swine was considered cursed. Human beings even ate carob pods, which were
used as animal fodder, in times of famine. This is an indication of the
complete destitution of the younger son. He comes to his senses when he is at
the depth of his degradation and in the midst of mire and filth.
are four parts to the speech that the younger son prepares
1. An address –
2. A confession
– “I have sinned”
3. Contrition –
“I am no longer worthy”
4. A Petition –
“treat me as one of your hired servants.
journey begins with coming to himself and ends with his going to his Father.
It means learning to say ABBA again, putting one’s whole trust in the heavenly
Father, returning to the Father’s house and the Father’s arms. That the younger
son is serious about his return is shown in his action. He gets up from the
mire and begins the return to his father.
father’s response is mind boggling. While the son is still a long way off, he
runs to meet him. In the first century it was considered undignified for grown
men to run. The father sets aside respect and dignity. His only focus is his
son. The son begins his speech but is not allowed to complete it. The father
interrupts his son even before he can finish. He gives instructions to his
servants for a robe, ring and sandals all of which indicate that the son is
given back his original place as son. The call to kill the fatted calf is a
sign that the return of the son is to be regarded as a time of celebration. The
dead son has come alive, the lost son has been found.
as the celebration is on, the elder son is introduced. When he is informed
about the reason for the celebration, he sulks and refuses to enter the house.
Like in the case of his younger son, the father goes to meet his elder son.
However, while he does not have to plead with the younger son, he does so with
the elder son. The elder son does not address his father as “Father”, nor does
he refer to his brother as “brother”. His argues his case on the grounds of
merit and what he thinks he rightfully deserves. Even as he does this, he
points to the failings of the younger son. What then is the point of being good?
In his response to the elder son, the father first addresses his son as “Son” though he was not addressed as “Father” and also reminds him that the younger son is also his brother. Reconciliation for the younger son meant reconciliation with his father, but for the elder son it means reconciliation with his brother. There is thus both the vertical dimension and the horizontal dimension of reconciliation.
Much of the fascination of this parable lies in its
ability to resonate with our life experiences: adolescent rebellion; alienation
from family; the appeal of the new and foreign; the consequences of foolish
living; the warmth of home remembered; the experience of self-encounter,
awakening, and repentance; the joy of reunion; the power of forgiveness; the
dynamics of “brotherly love” that leads to one brother’s departure and the
other’s indignation; and the contrast between relationships based on merit and
relationships based on faithful love.
Unfortunately, we usually learn to demand our rights
before we learn to value our relationships. The younger son was acting within
his rights, but he was destroying his closest relationships in the process. How
many times a week will a parent hear one child say to another, “This is mine.
Give it to me”? Children quickly learn to demand their rights, but it often
takes much longer for them to learn how to maintain relationships. Governments
and law courts defend our civil rights, but how do we learn to defend our civil
and familial relationships?
From a distance, the “far country” can be very
appealing. Young people leave home for fast living. Spouses move out to form
liaisons with exciting new partners. The glow that surrounds the far country is
a mirage, however. Home never looks as good as when it is remembered from the
The journey home begins with coming to oneself. That
means that the most difficult step is the first one. The younger son had to
face himself in the swine pen of his own making before he faced his father on
the road. Pride can keep us from admitting our mistakes; self-esteem may
require us to take decisive action to set right the things we have done wrong.
Although the opportunity to restore relationships and remedy wrongs begins with coming to oneself, it requires more. We must go to the person we have wronged. Was the younger son just seeking to improve his situation, or was he seeking reconciliation with his father? The direct confession in his interior monologue confirms the sincerity of his intent. Neither the younger son’s pride nor his shame mattered as much as his need to restore his relationship to his father. He did not ask for his filial privileges to be restored. He did not even ask for forgiveness. He merely stated his confession. When the prodigal son came to himself, he came to his father.
The temptation a parent faces is to allow the child’s separation to become reciprocal. If the child separates from the parent, the parent may be tempted to respond in kind. The parable’s model of parental love insists, however, that no matter what the son/daughter has done he/she is still son/daughter. When no one else would even give the prodigal something to eat, the father runs to him and accepts him back. Love requires no confession and no restitution. The joyful celebration begins as soon as the father recognized the son’s profile on the horizon.
Insofar as we may see God’s love reflected in the
response of the waiting father, the parable reassures all who would confess,
“Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you.” The father runs to meet
his son even before the son can voice his confession, and the father’s response
is far more receptive than the son had dared even to imagine. The father’s
celebration conveys the joy in heaven. The picture is one of sheer grace. No
penance is required; it is enough that the son has come home.
If this is the picture of God’s joy in receiving a
sinner coming home, then it can also give assurance of God’s love to those who
face death wondering how God will receive them. In the end we all return home
as sinners, so Jesus’ parable invites us to trust that God’s goodness and mercy
will be at least as great as that of a loving human father.
The elder brother represents all of us who think we
can make it on our own, all of us who might be proud of the kind of lives we
live. Here is the contrast between those who want to live by justice and merit
and those who must ask for grace. The parable shows that those who would live
by merit can never know the joy of grace. We cannot share in the Father’s grace
if we demand that he deal with us according to what we deserve. Sharing in
God’s grace requires that we join in the celebration when others are recipients
of that grace also. Part of the fellowship with Christ is receiving and
rejoicing with others who do not deserve our forgiveness or God’s grace. Each
person is of such value to God, however, that none is excluded from God’s
grace. Neither should we withhold our forgiveness.
The parable leaves us with the question of whether
the elder brother joined the celebration. Did he go in and welcome his brother
home, or did he stay outside pouting and feeling wronged? The parable ends
there because that is the decision each of us must make. If we go in, we accept
grace as the Father’s rule for life in the family.