The Lost Sons

The Lost Sons

Luke 15:11-32

            Kenneth Bailey was a Lukan scholar who taught at universities in the Middle East for forty years.  His time there, interacting with people at all levels of society and from various religious outlooks, gave him a unique insight into the world of the Bible.  He wrote several books on the gospel of Luke and other biblical passages.  I have been both blessed and challenged by his writing.  Blessed because his insights have given me a better understanding of the Bible.  Challenged because those insights have caused me to examine much of what I thought I knew about the Bible and re-evaluate both my knowledge and my beliefs.

            In my devotions I have been working my way through Luke’s gospel.  Recently I reached chapter fifteen, which contains three parables: the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the prodigal (lost) son(s).  Bailey’s writing has opened me to new ways of looking at this chapter.  As I read through the story of the lost sons, I was struck by three insights of my own.

            First, the translation I was using (English Standard Version) said the younger son “squandered his property in reckless living.”  I have seen the word riotous used, but never the word reckless.  This word sounds right to me.  From the moment we meet the younger son we are struck by his recklessness.  He asks his father for his share of the inheritance with no regard for what it will do to the family financial structure.  He takes his inheritance and leaves home with no thought of what it will do to the family social structure.  He goes to a “far country” with no thought of what he will do for a support system.  He spends his entire inheritance with no thought for his future.  When his reckless behavior finally catches up to him he is forced to accept the lowest possible employment, and finally to return home in disgrace.

            Second, when the younger son appears on the horizon, the father runs to him and kisses him.  Bailey reminds us that Middle Eastern fathers didn’t run.  They were too dignified to gather up their long robes, expose their legs and run to anyone, but especially to a son who had disgraced the family.  But what struck me is that the father gathered the son in his arms and kissed him.  Dirty from days living with pigs and walking dusty roads, disheveled, quite possibly with clothing in rags—a complete mess, the son is embraced and kissed by the father.  I am reminded of St. Francis kissing the leper even though he has an overwhelming loathing of lepers.  This is the depth of love, to express physical affection even to the most unclean.

            Third, I believe focusing only on the younger son misses the point Jesus was trying to make.  It is easy to be distracted by the younger son’s story.  His actions take up the majority of the parable.  He is front and center for two thirds of the story.  His return to the family is dramatic and complete.  The older son’s story seems like an afterthought.

            Jesus addressed this parable (actually all three parables) to the scribes and Pharisees, who criticized him for associating with and even eating with sinners.  How could he stand to be so close to those the law said were unclean? Couldn’t he see their condition?  Didn’t he know their lifestyle and how offensive it was?

            Jesus leaves the parable open ended.  We don’t learn what happened to the older son.  Does he join the party?  Is he reunited with his brother?  With his father?  Or does he choose to stay outside the family circle as the Pharisees and scribes are choosing to stay outside the kingdom of God?

            All three parables end with rejoicing.  Jesus uses earthly rejoicing to envision the celebration in heaven over a sinner who repents and finds his way home.  Jesus was inviting the religious leaders to join the party, hoping there would be rejoicing in heaven over their return.