Prodigal Father

This is the sermon I preached at St. Timothy Lutheran Church on Sunday 3/31/19. Sorry for the late posting. Had trouble with Blogger. 

In this chapter of Luke, Jesus answers the Pharisees’ complaint about how he welcomes sinners and even eats with them. This could mean that Jesus was host to them as guests. It was an issue of table fellowship—breaking bread together being the sign and seal of full acceptance. How scandalous!

Jesus uses three parables illustrating something lost and then found: the lost sheep, the lost coin and today’s parable, the lost son.

Jesus begins the parable with these words, “There was a man who had two sons,” (v. 11b). The role of the father is primary. In the parable, the focus is on his relationship with his sons. The father is featured in both the return of the younger son and in the reaction of the older son.

The brothers are referred to as “sons “of their father, but not as “brothers.” This focuses on their relationship to their father, but leaves their relationship to each other open as something to be dealt with later.

As the prodigal son collects his things and leaves his family, we see a progressive distancing of himself from his father. It was not until he “came to himself” (v. 17) that he could reclaim his identify, resolve to return home and realize he no longer had any claim on his father’s goods and morally could not be called a son. His journey of return began with coming to himself.

We do not know if the son actually repented. Some say “yes” and some “no.” If we go by scholar Joachim Jeremiahs’ definition, then he did. Jeremiahs says, “Repentance means learning to say

[Daddy] again, putting one’s whole trust in the heavenly Father, returning to the Father’s house and Father’s arms” (Joachim Jeremiahs, New Testament Theology: The Proclamation of Jesus).

The father’s words sum up the importance of the first part of the parable: the son is dead, he’s now alive, was lost, but now is found. The son’s death was due to his broken relationship with the family. He acted within his rights, but was destroying his closest relationships in the process. He dishonored his father, left his home and his land to live with Gentiles.

The father’s patience knew no bounds. He was waiting for his son’s return. It wasn’t like he had a phone call from his son or anything. On the day the son returns, the father sees a speck on the horizon moving toward him. From a distance of what seems like a thousand miles, he realizes it’s his son! The father runs to meet him.

It doesn’t matter what the son did or didn’t do. It doesn’t matter how long he’s been gone or how estranged they have become. Nothing else matters! Let the party begin! “Grace has come to this house, love wins out and redemption is realized, not by what the son could do, but by what the father chooses to give” (Debi Turley, Midweek Musings, Upstate NY Synod, ELCA).

The father has his son decked out in his own robe, recognizable as such by all. A ring for his finger was likely the family signet ring, granting authority and access to possessions. And sandals for his feet. This too was a sign of status. Then the fatted calf was enough food to feed 100 people.

The celebration is the impetus for the story’s second part. Now the older brother is introduced for the first time and boy is he mad! For the father to leave the party and his guests to deal with the older son was shameful, but necessary.

The older son does not even claim the younger son as his brother, only referring to him as “this son of yours,” (v. 30).This older son accuses his father of committing an injustice by rewarding his younger son’s bad behavior. Can’t you just hear it—the injustice of it all, the unfairness of it all, the nerve of that brother to show his face? And…how could the father welcome HIM back? Can you blame the older son? Wouldn’t many of us feel the same way?

In some ways, the older son begins acting like the younger son. He believes he is entitled to his father’s possessions (the ring, shoes, fatted calf and more). He separates himself from the family. He disrespects his father. Like the Pharisees, the older brother has done “everything right,” but misses the point. The party does not celebrate the younger son, but rather the father’s grace.

Again, the plot is characterized by distance and physical separation, signifying alienation. Just as the father left the house to greet the prodigal, so he now leaves the house and the celebration to have a word with the older son. He did not plead with the younger son, but he does with the elder one.

It’s interesting to compare the sons’ interactions with their father. The father didn’t have to plead with the younger son, but needs to with the older one. The younger son, the bad boy, always respectfully speaks to his father, while the elder brother refuses to acknowledge his relationship either to his father or to his brother. When the father was talking outside with his elder son, he referred to the prodigal as “your brother.” The father reminded the older brother that the younger one was still part of the family.

If repentance for the prodigal meant learning to say “Father” again, then for the elder son, it meant learning to say “brother” again.

“But we had to celebrate,” v. 32. Another way to translate this is “It was necessary…,” it “ought” to be done. You just have to party when the dead are alive and the lost are found.

The parable doesn’t tell us the ultimate response of the older brother; if he came in to rejoice with the others or if he stayed outside stewing.

The point of the parable is relationship. It’s not as much about the son that messed up, even though we know it as the parable of the Prodigal Son. The main character is actually the father and the parable is about his relationship with each son. He had two sons, loved two sons and went out to both, being gracious to both (vv. 20, 28).

Prodigal means wasteful. And we usually associate that with the younger son. But couldn’t it also be the story of the Father’s “wasteful grace”—the father giving his son the freedom to reject and squander what the Father has spent his life working for?

Jesus hung out with all kinds of socially unacceptable, unsavory people; those others were afraid to be seen with. Yet, that did not stop him; because of the love of the Father flowing through him.

Wednesday evening, we had the privilege of hearing Steve Cobb’s personal story and about his work at the Mental Health Association. Even though Steve has been working for many years in the field of mental health, he had to admit that some people with those issues are very scary. When asked about what we can do to help the situation, Steve said to listen to the person with the problem. I have information about the Mental Health Association and the other services we have heard about in previous weeks. Let us make contact to see what else we can do.

Ok, who wants to play guess who? Which character are we in the story? It may be different each time we read it, different each moment of our lives. Do we feel like the younger son who has to “come to [his] senses?” Other times we may feel like the older son, wondering how this other one could possibly be loved. Sometimes we may be a Pharisee, grumbling at the truth about the Kingdom that Jesus reveals.

The story ends with only our responses to it. We are the end of the story, so I would invite us to listen to God, to the Father’s heart speaking to our hearts and to listen to the people around us, even the scary ones. It is out of developing relationships, like Jesus does, that we can be channels of God’s love, as the father in the parable was. We too, must go in to the celebration. If we do so, we accept grace as the Father’s rule for life and relationships in the family of God. Amen.

Resources

Fred B. Craddock, Interpretation: Luke

______________, Preaching Through the Christian Year C

R. Alan Culpepper, The Interpreter’s Bible, Volume IX, Luke

Robb McCoy and Eric Fistler, pulpitfiction.com

New English Translation, notes

picture