The Prodigal Son

[Didacus]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1705603' date='Nov 20 2008, 12:01 PM']It may SEEM as if he had a right to be upset, but no one has a right to be upset when the Father rejoices. He had no REAL right to be angry. He may have felt personally wronged by the Father (God), but God does not wrong people. The older brother is most definitely in the wrong.[/quote]

I agree with the above. The second son was going against the will of his fathr point blank!

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1705603' date='Nov 20 2008, 12:01 PM']It may SEEM as if he had a right to be upset, but no one has a right to be upset when the Father rejoices. He had no REAL right to be angry. He may have felt personally wronged by the Father (God), but God does not wrong people. The older brother is most definitely in the wrong.[/quote]

Well, it would be natural to get upset. We have a right to our emotions, and we can freely share them with God. We also need to own our emotions and desires, so that when we find ourselves in conflict with our Father's will, we can obey rather than remain a slave. That part is left out of the parable. We don't know if he chooses to repent of his anger and embrace his brother or if he allows that bitterness to consume him and become a prodigal son at heart, which is a far worse condition.

[quote name='Didacus' post='1705706' date='Nov 20 2008, 03:09 PM']The second son repenting did not add to the point of the story.

Is it said that the first son repented specifically? 'cause if he went back to his father just so he can get a decent job; that's tough to say it was repentance.[/quote]

I'm getting a little confused... from the context, it sounds like you're referring to the younger son when you say "first son." He is the first one Jesus talks about in the parable, but he would be the second son in order of birth. Of course, he was motivated to return to his father in order to improve his living situation, but he did not return in order to re-gain the father-son relationship that he forfeited. The son's confession is, "I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands." It was his father's desire to embrace him as his son.

Plus, he did call him "Father," even though they were dead to each other. That shows that it was coming from his heart and not merely a financial or business (i.e. works-based) relationship, as it seems his elder brother had with his father.

Of course, we don't know if the elder son repents. I'm sure it was left out for a reason.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1705851' date='Nov 20 2008, 03:35 PM']Well, it would be natural to get upset. We have a right to our emotions, and we can freely share them with God. We also need to own our emotions and desires, so that when we find ourselves in conflict with our Father's will, we can obey rather than remain a slave. That part is left out of the parable. We don't know if he chooses to repent of his anger and embrace his brother or if he allows that bitterness to consume him and become a prodigal son at heart, which is a far worse condition.[/quote]


It is "natural" on this earth to have emotions contrary to the Will of God, but that is only our concupiscence shining through. We do not really have a "right" to emotions which are in conflict with our Father's will and should work to purify our desires, and conform them to what IS right.

That doesn't mean we are culpable for feeling anger, I don't mean that at all. I only mean that these emotions are disordered and will be purified one way or the other- here on earth or in purgatory- before we can enter the Kingdom.

By this I mean emotions against God. Jesus was obviously not happy about his upcoming Passion, but his feelings were never manifested as anger at the Father. His will was perfectly in tune with the Father's, and he never "left the feast" as the older brother in the parable did. The brother was wrong in that he fostered his disordered anger at the Father, and he was wrong in his departure from the feast.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='1705877' date='Nov 20 2008, 04:46 PM']By this I mean emotions against God. Jesus was obviously not happy about his upcoming Passion, but his feelings were never manifested as anger at the Father. His will was perfectly in tune with the Father's, and he never "left the feast" as the older brother in the parable did. The brother was wrong in that he fostered his disordered anger at the Father, and he was wrong in his departure from the feast.[/quote]

The older brother was never at the feast. He had been out in the fields and was approaching the house when he saw there was a huge feast and celebration.

At any rate, focusing on the older brother's sin misses the point. Both brothers sinned. We know younger one repents, but we don't know about the older one, and I find that to be a notable detail for Jesus to withhold from us.

Edited November 20, 2008 by LouisvilleFan

[tinytherese]

So far this thread is getting interesting. Our professor gave us notes on the story from this christian theologian named Kenneth Bailey who moved to the middle east. He said that he learned a lot from living in eastern culture and commented on how different their interpretation of scripture is from our western one. By looking at the eastern culture which Our Lord lived in we gather even more from scripture.

When the second son asked for his inheritance, according to the culture of that time, the father should have slapped him because he was saying that he wanted his own father to be dead. Keep in mind that this was (and still is) a very strong patriarchal part of the world where the father is highly respected. What the son did was shameful. The father reacted completely different from what the norm of handling such a situation would be: he actually gave in to his son's request!

"And not many days after, the younger son gathered all together, journeyed to a far country, and there wasted his possessions with prodigal living" (Lk 15:13 NKJV).

The phrase "gathered all together" meant that he sold what was part of his father's property that has now been given to him. Since such wealthy estates were in the town and not set apart from everyone else like a plantation or viniard, the community knew about the shameful things that this son had done. The very idea of selling what had been his father's property and the asking for inheritance thing before his father's death thing was outrageous. Community is very stressed in the east and so no one in the community would have bought the property. So an outsider (grrr) purchased the land.

The prodigal son went as low as feeding pigs for a living, which meant that he had a Gentile boss because no respectable Jew would associate with pigs because of the dietary laws written in the book of Leviticus. This was even more shameful. A Jew working at such a job and with a Gentile. Under Jewish law he had sunk lower than low.

Then when he thought about how his father's hired servants were treated better than him and seeks to go back to his father to be a hired servant, this shows that he really hadn't repented yet. Why? Because a hired servant wasn't a slave or household servant, but a craftsman, a skilled worker who would be treated rather well actually. He was going to go back to request that his father help him out again. Send him to be an apprentice to someone so that he could work his way in the world successfully again.

"Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you, and I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Make me like one of your hired servants" (Lk 15:18-19 NKJV). According to what my professor said, he is paraphrasing pharoah from the book of Exodus who when tormented by each of the plagues would apologize and ask Moses to ask God to make them stop but who is not sincerely sorry for anything, just to get himself out of trouble.

When he goes to meet his father, the fact that his father ran to meet him is very significant. A wealthy powerful patriarch would not have done such a thing. He again defied the norm. He wasn't majestically walking out to him nobly in his glorious robe, but in lifted up his robe, showing his legs and ran out to him like a mother would but not as a father ever would.

"Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight, and am no longer worthy to be called your son" (LK 15:21 NKJV). The son really does repent when he goes to his father because notice that the business deal that he was originally going to strike with his father is not included in what he says.

He ran to him in order to protect him from the community, because in such a culture, a son who had done what he had and who returned home should have been stoned to death. Then giving him not "the prettiest robe" as what one might think from reading "the best robe" but in reality it means "MY robe." The father orders that his own robe and only his robe which symbolises his position as a mighty patriarch. A ring and sandals are given to him too. He is not to be a servant because servants do not wear sandals. So he is in full reconciliation with him. By giving him these items, particularly his own robe, the community had to go with the father. If the patriarch wanted to do this then they had to. The father even took it as far as throwing a celebration for his return and everybody in the town had to come since he ordered that the fattened calf (which could feed a lot of people) be slaugtered.

When the first and older son speaks to his father, he is really being prideful since he points out that after all of the years that he obeyed him that he was not even given a young goat to share with his friends. Now a goat will only feed a select few, so he only wants to "make merry" with his own people, set apart from the rest of the unworthy community, unlike if what would happen with the slaughter of a fattened calf.

When the whole fifteenth chapter of Luke is read, we see the context of this parable. At the beginning the Pharisees and scribes complain about Jesus receiving sinners and eating with them and he then tells the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and then the prodigal son. So Our Lord is addressing the Pharisees and scribes that considered themselves to be the select holy few, so the elder son is meant to symbolize them and the prodigal son to symbolize the tax collectors and other sinners. Jesus of course identifies with the father and also is pointing him out to be Our Heavenly Father.

Oh all of the things we can get from what may seem like such a simple parable. I liked kafka's analysis too.

[picchick]

I have very mixed opinions on that passage. I think that everyone is bringing up good points but I am seeing right and wrongs with all of it.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1706077' date='Nov 20 2008, 07:27 PM']When the whole fifteenth chapter of Luke is read, we see the context of this parable. At the beginning the Pharisees and scribes complain about Jesus receiving sinners and eating with them and he then tells the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and then the prodigal son. So Our Lord is addressing the Pharisees and scribes that considered themselves to be the select holy few, so the elder son is meant to symbolize them and the prodigal son to symbolize the tax collectors and other sinners. Jesus of course identifies with the father and also is pointing him out to be Our Heavenly Father.

Oh all of the things we can get from what may seem like such a simple parable. I liked kafka's analysis too.[/quote]

That's really good insight there! Most of that I hadn't heard before, or maybe I did and forgot a long time ago That interpretation certainly makes sense, though I wouldn't restrict it to only Jesus talking about the Pharisees and sinners. Those same kinds of people exist in every generation among every group of people, which is why Jesus spoke in parables, so that his teachings could be applied to us just as well as his immediate audience.

As for kafka's analysis... I don't know about the Catholic-Protestant thing. I think that's really stretching. Perhaps it's a modern application of the parable to our lives, but first we need to understand what Jesus was originally saying to the Pharisees.

[quote name='picchick' post='1706640' date='Nov 21 2008, 03:07 AM']I have very mixed opinions on that passage. I think that everyone is bringing up good points but I am seeing right and wrongs with all of it.[/quote]

What are you mixed opinions, picchick?



This thread makes me wanna rock out to some "Carry On My Wayward Son"!

[picchick]

I have that song.

I am working on my thoughts throughout the day.

which to all of you...watch for a very lengthy post...

[Theosis3]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1704581' date='Nov 19 2008, 04:22 AM']In my world religions class we had to read chapter 15 of Luke and answer some questions about it. There's one that's really eating at me. It asks when the prodigal son truly repents of his ways and why. There's that part where he is so desperate that he eats the pigs' food and then realizes that his own father's servants have more than enough food to eat that he decideds to go back to his father's house to work as a servant. One could be tempted to think that he came back for the reason of getting food. Or maybe I'm just reading into it wrong. Or maybe he truly repented when he came face to face with his father.

Phamily?[/quote]

This is a really good question. I believe that this story shows us that repentance is a 'process' and not just some one time, on/off type of thing. It unfolds in us, in our hearts and works forth through us, but thats not us working it out, that is the Lord in us, the goodness of us, coming back to our original state as God created us.

This story is such a beautiful story, so simple, yet it can be taken so many different ways as we can all see. I believe the son truly repented when he returns back to his father and the words come out of his mouth "forgive me father...". This is where repentance is fulfilled in a way. All throughout the squandering of his money to feeding the pigs, this was what the prodigal son turned his life into. This was what he wanted, to live his own life. And the Father, out of his love for his son, allowed him to leave. Just as God allows us to turn away. Finally at his lowest point, feeding pigs, he comes to his senses and realizes that his Father can make it better. That is the first step of repentance. When we realized that we have fallen away through our own desires and doings. At first, I think he has mixed emotions. I think he is (at least in a way) still thinking of himself by thinking about what is better for HIM(in the type of work that would be easier for him). Yet through that very thought, his repentance beings. So again, I believe that repentance is a process in us, restoring us back to God.

What makes me rejoice is the reaction of the father... He runs out to his son. Before he's even heard him apologize, he running out to his son just to get to him faster. My friends, if this is a simple man, can you imagine the reaction of our Lord to those who return back to him? He gave His only Son to save us... Would you have done that for people who denied you, mistreated you, abused you? How we are so blessed by the love of God, that He has given us the Mystery / Sacrament of Confession, to also return back to Him.

As for the other brother, we begin to see the capital sin of envy and anger slipping in. That is our 'flesh' talking, not our 'spirit'. The fact is, this was his brother returning back to the family. Who knows how long it's been since he's seen him. Yet instead of thinking about "US" as in 'our family', he is thinks of himself outside of the family. Instead of rejoicing for our brother, we separate ourselves by comparing our lives or deeds, focusing on us. This very idea of 'me me me', is what caused the prodigal son to leave in the first place! We see the same evil idea that caused the prodigal son to sin against his father, working its way in the other son! When the focus is that we are all a family... when I hear of another Christian brother turning away from God, we should all hurt, because we risk losing one of our family members... Likewise, we should all rejoice when that same brother returns back our family with all of us. Friends, We are the Body of Christ. It is no longer me', but its "us", and Christ who lives in 'us'. So to this I say, Pray... "[b]Thy[/b] will be done..."

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='picchick' post='1707072' date='Nov 21 2008, 12:29 PM'] I have that song.[/quote]

I rock out to it every night on Guitar Hero

[quote name='picchick' post='1707072' date='Nov 21 2008, 12:29 PM'] which to all of you...watch for a very lengthy post...[/quote]

Even though you're a woman, I'll choose to chivalrously listen in my shining armor.

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1707225' date='Nov 21 2008, 02:28 PM']As for the other brother, we begin to see the capital sin of envy and anger slipping in.[/quote]

Elder brother, Cain called. He wants his thunder back.

[Tinkerlina]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1704581' date='Nov 19 2008, 04:22 AM']In my world religions class we had to read chapter 15 of Luke and answer some questions about it. There's one that's really eating at me. It asks when the prodigal son truly repents of his ways and why. There's that part where he is so desperate that he eats the pigs' food and then realizes that his own father's servants have more than enough food to eat that he decideds to go back to his father's house to work as a servant. One could be tempted to think that he came back for the reason of getting food. Or maybe I'm just reading into it wrong. Or maybe he truly repented when he came face to face with his father.

Phamily?[/quote]

You know, to be honest, I always though the Prodigal son was a little bit of a faker-the thing about food totally crossed my mind. I guess the idea was maybe that he made his own bed and had to lie in it and childishly ran to his father for help-even though many would have turned away such a loser, his father accepted him back just as God accepts us back regardless of how stupid we are.

But I always felt bad for the good son-he lived a pretty good life and pretty much got nothing. Poor guy. -Katie

[Tinkerlina]

[quote name='picchick' post='1704751' date='Nov 19 2008, 01:37 PM']But was it really jealousy or envy? Couldn't his anger be justifiable?[/quote]

I agree-if one of my sisters did that and my parents rewarded them with a banquet, you'd better be sure I wouldn't be too jolly about it. -Katie

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Tinkerlina' post='1707363' date='Nov 21 2008, 06:11 PM']But I always felt bad for the good son-he lived a pretty good life and pretty much got nothing. Poor guy. -Katie[/quote]

A pretty good life ain't good enough, my friend. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

[kafka]

sorry internet troubles. Roaming service. I will make my comments shortly.

Edited November 22, 2008 by kafka

[kafka]

[quote name='tinytherese' post='1706077' date='Nov 20 2008, 06:27 PM']So far this thread is getting interesting. Our professor gave us notes on the story from this christian theologian named Kenneth Bailey who moved to the middle east. He said that he learned a lot from living in eastern culture and commented on how different their interpretation of scripture is from our western one. By looking at the eastern culture which Our Lord lived in we gather even more from scripture.

When the second son asked for his inheritance, according to the culture of that time, the father should have slapped him because he was saying that he wanted his own father to be dead. Keep in mind that this was (and still is) a very strong patriarchal part of the world where the father is highly respected. What the son did was shameful. The father reacted completely different from what the norm of handling such a situation would be: he actually gave in to his son's request!

"And not many days after, the younger son gathered all together, journeyed to a far country, and there wasted his possessions with prodigal living" (Lk 15:13 NKJV).

The phrase "gathered all together" meant that he sold what was part of his father's property that has now been given to him. Since such wealthy estates were in the town and not set apart from everyone else like a plantation or viniard, the community knew about the shameful things that this son had done. The very idea of selling what had been his father's property and the asking for inheritance thing before his father's death thing was outrageous. Community is very stressed in the east and so no one in the community would have bought the property. So an outsider (grrr) purchased the land.

The prodigal son went as low as feeding pigs for a living, which meant that he had a Gentile boss because no respectable Jew would associate with pigs because of the dietary laws written in the book of Leviticus. This was even more shameful. A Jew working at such a job and with a Gentile. Under Jewish law he had sunk lower than low.

Then when he thought about how his father's hired servants were treated better than him and seeks to go back to his father to be a hired servant, this shows that he really hadn't repented yet. Why? Because a hired servant wasn't a slave or household servant, but a craftsman, a skilled worker who would be treated rather well actually. He was going to go back to request that his father help him out again. Send him to be an apprentice to someone so that he could work his way in the world successfully again.

"Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you, and I am no longer worthy to be called your son. Make me like one of your hired servants" (Lk 15:18-19 NKJV). According to what my professor said, he is paraphrasing pharoah from the book of Exodus who when tormented by each of the plagues would apologize and ask Moses to ask God to make them stop but who is not sincerely sorry for anything, just to get himself out of trouble.

When he goes to meet his father, the fact that his father ran to meet him is very significant. A wealthy powerful patriarch would not have done such a thing. He again defied the norm. He wasn't majestically walking out to him nobly in his glorious robe, but in lifted up his robe, showing his legs and ran out to him like a mother would but not as a father ever would.

"Father, I have sinned against heaven and in your sight, and am no longer worthy to be called your son" (LK 15:21 NKJV). The son really does repent when he goes to his father because notice that the business deal that he was originally going to strike with his father is not included in what he says.

He ran to him in order to protect him from the community, because in such a culture, a son who had done what he had and who returned home should have been stoned to death. Then giving him not "the prettiest robe" as what one might think from reading "the best robe" but in reality it means "MY robe." The father orders that his own robe and only his robe which symbolises his position as a mighty patriarch. A ring and sandals are given to him too. He is not to be a servant because servants do not wear sandals. So he is in full reconciliation with him. By giving him these items, particularly his own robe, the community had to go with the father. If the patriarch wanted to do this then they had to. The father even took it as far as throwing a celebration for his return and everybody in the town had to come since he ordered that the fattened calf (which could feed a lot of people) be slaugtered.

When the first and older son speaks to his father, he is really being prideful since he points out that after all of the years that he obeyed him that he was not even given a young goat to share with his friends. Now a goat will only feed a select few, so he only wants to "make merry" with his own people, set apart from the rest of the unworthy community, unlike if what would happen with the slaughter of a fattened calf.

When the whole fifteenth chapter of Luke is read, we see the context of this parable. At the beginning the Pharisees and scribes complain about Jesus receiving sinners and eating with them and he then tells the parables of the lost sheep, the lost coin, and then the prodigal son. So Our Lord is addressing the Pharisees and scribes that considered themselves to be the select holy few, so the elder son is meant to symbolize them and the prodigal son to symbolize the tax collectors and other sinners. Jesus of course identifies with the father and also is pointing him out to be Our Heavenly Father.

Oh all of the things we can get from what may seem like such a simple parable. I liked kafka's analysis too.[/quote]
I'm impressed.
Now you've come up with a few good insights. I am impressed, seriously I am. I dont agree with them all, but just remember, there are several meanings to Sacred Scripture, like mine which are eschatological, and which in my humble tried opinion, will become true. But yours are more down to earth, I love them, and I have now benefited from reading them.

I like your direction, I like your attitude. You make me happy and hopeful.

Feel free, to PM me with any questions about Sacred Scripture.

[quote name='Theosis3' post='1707225' date='Nov 21 2008, 01:28 PM']This is a really good question. I believe that this story shows us that repentance is a 'process' and not just some one time, on/off type of thing. It unfolds in us, in our hearts and works forth through us, but thats not us working it out, that is the Lord in us, the goodness of us, coming back to our original state as God created us.

This story is such a beautiful story, so simple, yet it can be taken so many different ways as we can all see. I believe the son truly repented when he returns back to his father and the words come out of his mouth "forgive me father...". This is where repentance is fulfilled in a way. All throughout the squandering of his money to feeding the pigs, this was what the prodigal son turned his life into. This was what he wanted, to live his own life. And the Father, out of his love for his son, allowed him to leave. Just as God allows us to turn away. Finally at his lowest point, feeding pigs, he comes to his senses and realizes that his Father can make it better. That is the first step of repentance. When we realized that we have fallen away through our own desires and doings. At first, I think he has mixed emotions. I think he is (at least in a way) still thinking of himself by thinking about what is better for HIM(in the type of work that would be easier for him). Yet through that very thought, his repentance beings. So again, I believe that repentance is a process in us, restoring us back to God.

What makes me rejoice is the reaction of the father... He runs out to his son. Before he's even heard him apologize, he running out to his son just to get to him faster. My friends, if this is a simple man, can you imagine the reaction of our Lord to those who return back to him? He gave His only Son to save us... Would you have done that for people who denied you, mistreated you, abused you? How we are so blessed by the love of God, that He has given us the Mystery / Sacrament of Confession, to also return back to Him.

As for the other brother, we begin to see the capital sin of envy and anger slipping in. That is our 'flesh' talking, not our 'spirit'. The fact is, this was his brother returning back to the family. Who knows how long it's been since he's seen him. Yet instead of thinking about "US" as in 'our family', he is thinks of himself outside of the family. Instead of rejoicing for our brother, we separate ourselves by comparing our lives or deeds, focusing on us. This very idea of 'me me me', is what caused the prodigal son to leave in the first place! We see the same evil idea that caused the prodigal son to sin against his father, working its way in the other son! When the focus is that we are all a family... when I hear of another Christian brother turning away from God, we should all hurt, because we risk losing one of our family members... Likewise, we should all rejoice when that same brother returns back our family with all of us. Friends, We are the Body of Christ. It is no longer me', but its "us", and Christ who lives in 'us'. So to this I say, Pray... "[b]Thy[/b] will be done..."[/quote]
I couldnt agree with you more. Good insights, nay glorious insights, and thank you.

This is my favorite passage ever!

Edited November 22, 2008 by kafka