Brief synopsis of the readings: Joshua describes the end of the journey from slavery to the promised land. They celebrated Passover and on the next day they were able to enjoy unleavened bread roasted corn. Because they could now feast on food from the land of Canaan they no longer received manna. Luke’s Gospel recounts the Parable of the Prodigal Son. The Pharisees complained that Jesus ate with sinners. In response Jesus told about a man who had two sons. His younger son approached his father and asked for his inheritance in advance; on receiving it he gathered everything and went to a distant country “where he squandered his money on a life of debauchery.” After blowing his inheritance and finding himself in a land suffering from famine he took a job feeding unclean pigs. He soon realized that his father’s servants lived a better life and resolved to return to his father and ask to be hired as a servant. Nearly home his father saw him coming, embraced him and rejoiced. His son confessed his sin and asked for a job. But instead his father proclaimed a feast as his son had come back from the dead. But the older son grew angry at this and refused to join the feast. He told his father: “Look, all these years I have slaved for you and never once disobeyed your orders, yet you never offered me so much as a kid for me to celebrate with my friends.” His father responded: “My son, you are with me always and all I have is yours” and pleaded with his older son to join the feast.
I don’t think I’ve ever met a Christian who wasn’t aware of the Parable of the Prodigal Son. Jesus told many parables but this one appears to hold an important spot in our faith journeys.
That’s good and bad. It’s good because it’s a crucial tale of injury, humility, and forgiveness. It’s bad because when we read it we can easily gloss over it and assume we’ve already learned all there is to know about it. At least for me I learn something new every time I read it. This time I recognized that of the three principal characters, only the older son followed the rules.
Let’s begin with the younger son. Rules of inheritance vary from place to place, time to time, and family to family but it appears that on the father’s death his assets would be split between his sons. His older son was content to follow the commandment to honor his parents and work for his father until his death.
The younger son, well, that’s another story. He wasn’t content to wait for his inheritance, he demanded it now. He broke the commandment. He wasn’t content to wait for what he felt he was owed and demanded his inheritance right now. No doubt he felt his father’s death was taking too long and he had plans. And his father disobeyed a custom and give his younger son half of his estate.
In my years of ministry I can’t even imagine how many times I’ve seen this scenario: (Allegedly) adult children who see their parents’ wealth as their own. Oftentimes this creates horrible conflicts as one child with a history of irresponsible money management demands his (or her) “fair share” at the expense of his (or her) siblings.
And their actions cause horrible pain for the parents. All parents pray that their children will become responsible and grateful adults who love each other. But like the sons in this parable it doesn’t always work out that way and many parents attempt to placate the irresponsible child in a search for harmony.
I don’t know but I suspect the father here attempted that. I suspect he hoped that if he gave his younger son half of his land he would cultivate that land and live in harmony with his brother and father. I hoped for that too but it was not to be: he clearly sold that land and hit the road, convinced that he had enough to live a life of wild living. He didn’t. Any parent will admit that nobody can hurt you like your child, and if you don’t believe me reread Shakespeare’s King Lear.
Meanwhile his father and brother lived with the awareness that a stranger was tilling their land. But more than that his father rightfully feared that he would never see his younger son again. They didn’t have social media and in fact they didn’t even have a phone book; anyone who wished to disappear had no trouble doing that.
Without reading too much into the reading I can only imagine how many hours his father spent staring down the road looking for a cloud of dust. I can only imagine how many hours his father came into town asking if anyone had seen his son, even to the point where the townspeople avoided him only because they had no news.
And one day…
And one day it happened. The father saw a cloud of dust, a man coming toward him. Was it him? Does he dare hope? Can it be?
This is the day the father really broke the rules. You see, the younger son broke the rules and left. His father was supposed to make him pay for his sin. He was supposed to stand on the doorstep, wait for his son to prostrate before him, and wait for his son to beg for forgiveness. And in fairness his son was willing to do that. Tradition demanded that this. Forgiveness could be given or refused but it needed to be asked.
But the father broke the rules. He didn’t wait. He ran to his son, embraced his, and ignored his son’s attempt to ask for forgiveness. The father cared nothing for the rules but only for forgiveness. This son would not be a servant, but a son.
A caveat here: Many read this and fear that now that the younger son is home, he’ll come to his father in a few years, or even a few months, and demand his share again. To this I say that the father said to the older son: “My son, you are with me always and all I have is yours.” In other words the younger son will not inherit anything else when his father dies, as he has already received it.
So what happens from here? I’ve often wondered how this family went forward from this. I hope the man and his sons found enough forgiveness and reconciliation to once again become a family. I hope that anger and jealousy found healing.
In my ministry I’ve seen it go both ways. But I always pray that healing and reconciliation win out in the end.