October 27, 2009
Out of Obligation
In the Parable of the Prodigal Son I’ve always felt that when the prodigal returned home the older brother had hurt feelings mixed with righteous indignation…and I couldn’t fault him for that. I’m now seeing this parable from a different angle. When the older brother heard that the father had killed the fatted calf and received the prodigal back with peace, it meant that he and the father had reconciled and the prodigal paid no penalty. By the prodigal taking his share and leaving, he had control over his money. The older son also had his share, but it wouldn’t be under his control until his father’s death. Adding insult to injury, the position of the older son dictated that he be ‘head waiter’ to receive and serve the guests. No wonder he was angry and refused to enter the banquet. I’ve always given the older son kudos for being obedient and serving his father for years. It now appears that his actions were not done out of love, but out of obligation…and for gain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----I’ve always assumed both the older brother and the father had opportunity to be very offended at the desires and actions of the younger brother. There must have been many cultural expectations that were dashed upon the rocks by his mischief, and nobody in the family could escape recognizing the obvious destruction caused to the whole household. Assets were not merely removed from the family’s possession, but assets are also the tools and supplies of trade and business. And the younger brother, himself, was talent and hands useful to the family business. The prosperity of the family must have taken a hit. And for the younger brother to fail in caring about that loss of property, talent, and prosperity to the household besmirches the sense of interpersonal obligation and duty towards one another.
-----A person can easily relate to the ire of the older brother at seeing the fatted calf killed to party over this little brat’s return. And as you say about the insight you shared, his ire was probably elevated greatly by stumbling across a party in process at which he should have been an important servant. Whenever I have read this parable, the statement the older brother made about himself, “Lo, these many years I have served you, and I never disobeyed your command...” (Luke 15:29) instantly projects upon my mind the image of the Pharisees. Stepping into the Pharisees mindset, he viewed the party as a reward, and his expectation of rewards was that they go to those who do right and obey. In this mindset of the Pharisees, in many ways, Jesus breached the family obligation to do all His service within the cultural structure maintained by them. He ran off with their religious assets of the people’s curiosity and admiration, and His talents were being applied outside the trade of their household. Although Jesus was in no way the prodigal son, in the Pharisees mindset, He was. He was plundering what was theirs. In some ways the attitude the Pharisees held of themselves relative to others who would approach God was like head waiters to receive and serve them as guests. Yet here was Jesus robbing their carefully constructed house of its meaning by teaching great masses of people without consideration for their directive authority. Then when they had gained Jesus’ death, to their chagrin, He returns like did this disobedient brat, and a giant party strikes up totally without them! I know that is not the point of the parable, but it kind of makes me chuckle.
-----Thank you. That little insight of the older brother as head waiter added a significant piece of flesh to one angle I like to see in this parable.
Love you all,
Steve Corey
Post a Comment