~—

(URE ISs11e32. ETH PR EPAYETTE,, TADIAMA
MARCH 24, 1974 JOHN M. BUCHANAN

I was reading Trends magazine this week, an issue devoted to Church
renewal, and came across an article that was devastatinly critical of
preaching. The author, Rachel Conrad Wahlberg, estimates that in her life
time she has heard no fewer than 3,896 sermons and she observes: "The
monotony of the themes is deadening. Every year tiie same subjects, the same
Church-year emphases. Every year another sermon on the prodigal son, and
another on the scribes and pharisees. Jesus, I agree, had a lot of good things
to say; but I doubt if even he would enjoy hearing one of his own parables
rehashed every year for forty years." (Trends, March'April 1974, P.10)

Well, here comes the 1974 version: a sermon that will deal with both the
prodigal and the scribes and pharisees. Ms. Wahlberg had a point, but in all
fairness let it be noted that this will be the third sermon on tnis text since
1966. I got a little defensive when I read the article and checked my file
to see wnen last I had used the text.

And yet, perhaps it is not an altogether nonotonous exercise to think
about this story once a year. It seems to me that it is terribly important
for what it says about God and man and religion. My problem has never been
what to say about the Prodigal Son,but rather isolating and focusing because
of the complexity of the story, and its richness and suggestiveness for our
practice of Christian Faith.

As Literature, the parable contains three stories, each of which can stand
by itself, but each of which intersects the other two. In that sense, it
is a masterpiece of poetic genius. William Barclay calls it the "greatest
short story ever told." Depending on where you begin the point of the
parable can lie in the story of the loving father: or in his relationship
with either of his sons. The point may be found in the relative behavior
and attitudes of the two sons: or it might be in their relationship as brothers
My bias, at least in the 1974 version, is expressed in the title, "The

Prodigal Sons" which, by the way, is intentionally plural and not a typo-

2 MARCH 24, 1974

Pdk FAUY2ZGAL SUS
graphical error.

In any case, tet's 100k briefly at the three stories. The first has to
do with the younger son of a wealthy father who asked for his share of his
father's estate. The Taw dictated that if a man had two sons the older
received two thirds of the estate when the father died, the younger, one
third. It was not uncommon for a man to divide his property between his
heirs before he died. A rather sensible idea, I think, tn Tiew of the nearly
inevitable conflict and disruption that results when the nie gets divided in
our day. The son received his one third - cattle, property, jewels, Toans
outstanding, cashed it all in and in a matter of days left for a far country.
We don't know where ne went, but in every way it was a long way from home.
Rather quickly he ran through his windfall, and wien a famine hit, he §egan
to hurt. In desparation ne sold himself into servitude and was given the job
of feeding a rich man's swine - “a task the utter shame of which only a Jew
could feel" (G.A.Buttrick, Parables , P.191) The degradation of feeding pigs
for a Jew can onty be compared to youand I rumaging through our neighbor's
garbage can for food.

"He came to himself" the story goes on. He planned an elaborate con-
fession and decided to raturn home as one of his father's hired servants.

But as he approached his father saw him coming, ran to meet him, kissed ind
embraced nim. Instead of saying "I told you so" ~ a banquet of reunion was
ordered, and the prodigal son was given a robe, ring and shoes - honor “
authority and sonship.

The second theme has to do with the loving father, and if there is a
single theme to the parable this is it. His love for his son included extend-
ing ‘freedom and trust even when there was little apparent reason to do so.
His tove for his was unaltered by the son's prodigality. When he saw his son
coming down the road he took the initiative. The sequence in tne story is all~
important. Before the son had an opportuntiy to recite his well-rehearsed

confession the father reached out and embraced him. "Reconciliation preceeds

"THE PRODIGAL SONS" -3- MARCH 24, 1974
repentance" is the message here, You don't win a father's forgiveness by
saying "I'm sorry”. YOu say I'm sorry because you suddenly realize that he
has already forgiven you.

During the final days of the Civil War Abraham Lincoln found himself
surrounded by people who could not wait for the surrender in order to punish
the Confederate States and execute the Confederate leaders. When they asked
nim one day what he: planned to do he said simply, "I will treat them as if

they had never been away." And on the day of surrender, when people gathered
in patriotic ecstay, Lincoln ordered the band to play "Dixie."

The tneological word for it is "Grace". The prattiéal definition is.

“love with no strings attached." And the Gospel of desus Christ is precisely
that God loves us - just as that father loved his son. To paraphrase the
Psalmist, God does not keep a score card of our sins. Rather, when we
become our true selves - when we realize that we are truly and fully human
only in relationship with him, when we return - the slate is wiped.clean. We
are loved and accepted and forgiven. That is the Gospel. And that is why
you are likely to hear sermons based on tnis parable with regularity.

Tt would have been nice if Jesus had stopped at this point -with the
uneltered love and grace of the father. But he didn't. And I've always
been particulariy intrigued with the third theme - the story of the Elder
Brother - the one who comes out looking just as prodigal as the other. Only
when the story ends - he's still outside sutking.

When he saw what was happening as a resuit of his younger brother's
return he resented it. In fact, he felt pretty good about his brother leaving
in the first place. Compared with that demonstration of immaturity and
irresponstbility he looked pretty good to himself - his father - and to anyene
whe knew what was going on. And I can imagine him falling asleep every night
with the smug smite of self-righteousness on his face. And so whem his
brother returned, and instead cf getting what he deserved, was suddenly

the guest of honor at a part the o:-er brother whined: "What about me?" lle's

THE PRODIGAL SouS" a HARCH 24, 1974
the one wno brings up sex, by thevay. "That son of yours has wasted your
money on harlots - while I've been working in the fields. it isn't fair."
And because of that -his self-righteousness - his arrogance - he becomes

the prodigal. te is the one in a far country ~ miles avay from the love of
his father. Tt's a self-imposed prodigality. The father loves him too - but
he decides to stay away.

That, I would submit, was loaded wien Jesus told it: and still is, if we
have the courage to think about it for a while. Jesus had a lot of trouble
with people wno laoked, acted and sounded like the elder brother, In fact,
they ~ Scribes and Pharisees -~ were the ones who successfully conspired to
have nim crucified. He still has trouble with peopte wie look act, and sound
like the Ele¢er Brother: no longer Scribes and Pharisees but Presbyterians
Enicapalians, Catholics, Baptists, Methodists.

But first you have to udnerstand what prompted him to tell this story.

At the beginning of the 15th chapter of Luke great crowds of people were
following desus, and when "tax collectors and sinners" were seen to be prom-
inently among his associates, the Scribes and Pharisees began to whine: "This
man receives sinners and eas with them." The parable of the Prodigal Son is
actually the last of three stories told by Jesus in response to the self-
righteousness whining of the Scribes and Pharisees.

They.were understandably upset by what they were seeing - and we needn't
be too harsh on them. They, after all, were the righteous ones. Everyone
knew that. They were in the business of religion. They had made a profession
of it. They obeyed the Mosiac law to the letter - and when they weren't
fasting and praying they were forming committees to talk about fasting and
praying. They were learned men, respected men. They gave one tenth of all
they had to the poor. In the chaos and discouragement of the first century
they kept alive the tradition and dignity and hope of the nation.

And here comes Jesus - inferring at Teast that he was the Messiah of

israel - and instad of spending his time ‘with them - instead of patting them

ww be

bie PRUUIGAL SONS ~5al MARCH 24, 1974
on the back for their conspicuous virtues - he notoriousi¥ showed up inthe
company of sinners. flo wonder they wore upset.

“Sinners“, here is a bread term that might be translated "trash". Poor
pegie, traitors, prastitutes, thieves, fishermen: people who had no time for
or interest in the formalities of institutional religion: Jews only because
tney Tived on the land: Peaopie wno had forgotten their heritage and completely
disregarded the religioys law, not to mention propriety and social prudence.
Before we deal too harshly with the Scribes and Pharisees we need to super-
impose that data on our situation and see how it feels.

In the context of the Hew Testament, then, we see tris parable as a
heightening of the conflict between Jesus and the religious authorities.

They couldn't have hetped but get the point. They were the Elder Brother -
and when they heard it they were quite understandably enfuriated,

aeorge Buttrick comments: "Jesus was compelled to relate the aftermath
of the Prodigal’s return so that Pharisees of tiat and every age mignt have
a mirror whereby to see themselves and God.” (P.195)

For, you see, religion - down through the centures right up to the present
has had a way of becoming Pharisaical. Regardless of where it begins, it
always seems to end up providing a device by which men can feel good about
themseives at the expense of other men. Even though it begins on the basis
of unity and Tove and common humanity, somehow it ends up becoming a wall of
arrogant piety that separates men from each other.

Psycnotogicaly, we can understand how it happens. Paul Tournier, Swiss
Theologian and Psychiatrist, observes that from infancy on “all trauma is
connected with this doubt about being loved...The child has the impression
that his parent's love is conditioned: that they will love him on on the
condition that he is good.“ (Suilt and Grace P.189)

Tournier suggests that this is a universal tuman condition and proposes
that men have always projected this basic anxtety into their religion. "They

‘picture God as one who loves them only on the condition that they are Bo r90)
P.190

ink PAUL Oude mu MARCH 24, 1974

at is, af course, a very Shull step from that ~ from the assumption that
God loves us if we are good - to the conclusion that it is the function of
religion to be thinking about and defining, as precisely possible, those
good things to do which wei-1 cause God to lave us.

That was the game played by the Pharisees and Saduceaes. They had it
backwards. Instead of obeying the religious law, fasting and praying in
response to a Gud wie loved them- they were doing all those things in order
to cause God to lave them.

Tt ts the same game that was played out dramatically at the time of the
reformation. The Church, ft was assumed, knew what a man had ta do to please
God. And ance that assumption is made all sorts of things are possibie. Yeu
can get peopte to do whatever you want them to do if they believe that you
alone know what dt takes to please God.

And today, it is a game played with dogmatic vigor. “Say it this way:
have this particular experience: believe these doctrines: do that - don't
do this - and you'll be saved. God will love you." Tournter calls it the
“wilderness of multiplied guitt.*

Once you have been convinced that you know ail the riagnt things to co to
please Ged, two things happen. First, you spend jour life worrying whethnei
you're doing snough: and second, you look down your nose at those poor
sianers who don't agree with you aad who cannot be loved by God 2s much as
you are.

A modern misstonary has written that: "What goes by the name of Chris-
tianity im much of the world, is to a great extent unbridled self-assertion
in religious disguise."

And the late Reinhold itiebuhr, for a generation the leading American
theologian put it eloguentiv: "ioral pride makes virtue the very vekicte of
Sins a fact which explains why the Mew Testament is so critical of the
righteous in comparison with publicans and sinners....For this reason

religion is not simply. as is generally supposed, an inherently virtuous

vHE PRODIGAL SUNS wf MARGH 24, i974
humana quest for Ged -t *s mereiy a final battleground....In that battic
aven the most pious practices may become instruments of pride."

The Churcn of Jesus Christ must constantly be alert to the fact that
religion has within it tha seeds of Pharisaism. Most of us can't real ly
identify with the younger son in the parable. He's refreshing, to ba sure,
8utrrick suggests that if you had to choose one of them as a companion on a
week-end campird trip mast cf us would pick him over his older brother.

But we're mot crdinarily prodigal in the way he was. He'’re not flagrant
ébusers cf the common morality.

But we have heen known to look down our noses at those who violate our
ethical norms, "Why these people are all that way: put them on welfare and
the first thing they do is buy a colored T.¥. and go out and get drunk."

We have been known to Took suspiciously at the unemployed - the migrant
worker - the stum‘dwetler - the wing - the junkie - and to feel good that we
aren't Vike that. We krow a little bit about how the Elder Brother “eit -
because wo've felt that way too.

Theré is, it seems, an inherent human incapacity to live with the idea
of grace. Perhaps it's becase we have so rarely seen jt in ourselves. Wa
wold prefer to earn our way - in our relationships with others -~ in life -
and with God. He would prefer a neatly structured system in which peopie are
loved by Sod for being goad, and hated by God for not being good: a system
based on ovr thealegy ~ cur morality - our way of life. And the very discom-
forting toing about this parable is that the Elder Brother couldn't cur
through that system long enough to udnerstand the depths of his father's
leve for him. His father said: “Son, you are always with me. And all “hat
1 have is yours." But he didn't even hear it,

God loves us. He comes cown the road to meet us before we have a chance
to say "I'm sorry. tte comes out into the field - to meet us in the midst
of our resentment and says "I Tove you."

desus Christ was crucified becagse that idea was so radical - so offen-

“Tie PRUbaGaL suits ~é- WARCH 24, 1974
Sive. His death is the Symbol of tue depth of God's Tove - for he loved and
forgave even those who were crucifying him.

ft is still a radical idea. It is stil? news. God has given us what

some men spend a life time trying to @arn. God loves us. AMEN

Sometimes, our fathar, it offends our sense of propriety that you siiould Tove
all of us. Help us to Tay aside all the devices we use to make ourselves
acceptable ~ and to know that we are foved. Grant us that same grace ta love:

through Jesus Christ our Lord. ATE: