The Parable of the prodigal: “While he was still a lng way off, his father caught sight of him and was filled with compassion. He ran to his son, embraced him and kissed him.” Luke 15: 1-3. 11-32
The parable at the centre of today’s gospel-reading is about male behaviour in a society in which shame and honour were important considerations. The younger son brought shame on his family by pestering his father for his share of the family inheritance and by his loose and riotous living; the extravagant father set himself up as a target of the criticism of fellow, hard-working fathers because of his leniency and failure to call his younger son to account and the elder brother proved himself to be as lost as his younger brother through his petulant anger and the insults he directed at his father.
While this parable is the story of what happened when the younger son in a privileged family insisted on going his own way after getting his inheritance from his father, it is also a journey into the complex relationships that can develop in a family when self-interest surfaces and takes hold. The parable was also Jesus’ response to the grumblers around who were complaining about his welcoming sinners and even eating with them. It offers an insight into the compassion, sensitivity, love and care that characterised the way in which Jesus reached out to those around him as he went about his mission to the world. Moreover, it illustrates that Jesus understood not only the complexity of human relationships but the range of emotions we can all experience as we make our way through life. The different kinds of behaviour we display and the variety of emotions we express all give others an insight into what’s going on inside us. It is, therefore, instructive for us to look at the emotional turmoil going on inside the two sons at the centre of this parable. Their experience is a mirror for us that reflects to us something of ourselves. Therein lies food for our reflection.
However, in order for us to come to better understand this parable, we need to look at the societal context in which it is set. To begin with, we are presented with a young man who had seemingly grown bored with country life and was itching to get a taste of exciting city life. Even though his father gave in to the young man’s pleading and even gave him the full share of the inheritance due to him, the lad still had a binding, filial responsibility to care for his father in his father’s old age. The fact that this wayward son squandered all he had received did not relieve him of his duty to support his father. Meanwhile, the older son also had an entitlement to to an inheritance equal to that given to his younger brother. What makes the father a target of criticism from all those who knew him was the extravagant reception with which he welcomed home the errant younger son. Societal expectations immediately categorised the old man as a fool. Moreover, the restoration of the ring of sonship to the young man’s hand, his being clothed in lavish garments and the provision of the choicest meat for a celebratory meal, all before the older son had come in from toiling in the fields, would have been labelled as the actions of a doddering old fool. The point, of course, is that the beneficence, forgiveness, compassion and love of God, represented in the father’s conduct, are not going to be controlled and limited by societal expectations. God’s love and forgiveness for those of us who stray are limitless. Worthy of note is the fact that the young man’s decision to return home seeking forgiveness was motivated by self-interest rather than true compunction. The conclusion he had reached was that, even if he were treated only as a hired servant, he would be far better off than having to endure the destitution into which he had fallen. The white-hot anger that erupted from the older son at his feeling slighted and overlooked by his father would have been seen by observers as understandable and justified, (and, maybe, by us too!) After all, here was the only one in the family who had remained loyal to and supportive of the elderly father. Consequently, he would have been applauded by the neighbours. Yet, we are left to wonder whether he had a change of heart and brought himself to reconcile with both his father and younger brother
The genius of the parable, whether it is a transcript of a story told by Jesus or a creation put together by Luke, is that it does not have a fairytale ending. In fact, we are not offered a clear conclusion, but left puzzling over the messiness that is often the fallout from broken family relationships – life situations with which we are not entirely unfamiliar. Our own experience has taught us that God’s boundless mercy, compassion, forgiveness and love are not always recognised, appreciated and welcomed by us, by our family members and by those beside whom we sit in our church pews every weekend. This parable gives us opportunity to pause and reflect on the way in which we respond to the approaches our beneficent God makes to us, as well as on the pettiness and petulance we display when we believe we have been slighted or overlooked by those with whom we live, work and associate.
Through this parable, Luke invites us to ask ourselves with which character we most closely identify. Perhaps we may identify with something in the behaviour of each of the characters. It may be easier for me to ask myself to name the Lenten challenges which the parable calls me to address and to set about actually addressing them.