Luke
16:1-13
This is one of the Gospel lessons
most preachers would choose to ignore.
The last four verses will preach – preach nicely. But the story which opens the reading is
difficult. And while those last four
verses are chocked full of great moral lessons and teachable insights, does the
story which opens the chapter really say the same thing?
The name often given this story is
“The dishonest manager,” or “The Unrighteous Servant.” And yet, in the story, when the rich man
enters the story for a second time, he does so in order to commend the
dishonest manger.
You have heard this story before –
so you tell me. Why is this dishonest
manager “commended”?
Barbara Rossing teaches at my alma
mater – Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago.
And she says you can’t make sense of this story unless you are willing
to first understand a few things about commerce in the time of Jesus. I know some of you don’t like it when sermons
turning into teaching moments, but I didn’t select this text, I only drew the
short straw to have to apply it to our lives.
The first thing to remember is the
biblical prohibition on usury. We all
know what that is, right? You cannot
loan money to another member of the faith community and charge them interest. Jews can’t charge interest to other
Jews. Christians can’t charge interest
from other Christians. That is part of
the reason why Jewish bankers were welcomed into Christian Europe – so someone
could loan money to aspiring business operators. The rules prohibiting usury haven’t gone
away; they are still in the bible. It is
just among the laws which we totally ignore.
Now, you couldn’t loan money, but
you could share. You could offer some grain
to your neighbor, let him plant the grain in his field, and at harvest time he
would return to you your original amount of wheat, with a bit more as a thank
you gift. Because there were laws about
usury, you couldn’t set the exact amount you would expect in return, but the
person borrowing the seed could write you a note saying, “This is what I will
give you.”
Managers, of the sort talked about
in this story that Jesus tells, were responsible for keeping track of seed or
oil shared with another. The manager’s
job was to keep up with what it was that the “grateful neighbor” had said they
would give in return. The books were a
bit lose, to say the least.
One more wrinkle. Managers were not paid a salary. They were entrusted with the books of their
overlords and their task was to navigate the balance between what the master
expected from the grateful neighbor and what the borrower would tolerate. Add too much to the initial loan and the
neighbor wasn’t happy. Collect too
little, and you could expect to be dismissed.
These managers worked on commission.
And this commission consisted of how much they could add to the original
bill.
So this particular manager is about
to be relieved of his post. We are told
that the rich man was of the opinion that he has “squandered (the rich man’s)
property.” Whatever these charges were,
is seems unlikely that it was the same sort of thing which are described in the
next couple of verses. But it is not beyond
the realm of possibilities that this “squandering” may have involved acts of
charity toward the poor or disadvantaged.
We shouldn’t assume that the manager was doing something of which we
would all disapprove. We only know that
the rich master was not happy.
We do tend to make that assumption –
don’t we? The assumption that the
manager was doing something inappropriate.
Jesus is the one who tells the story, but in Jesus’ story the criticism
of the manger is in words spoken by the rich man. Even in verse 8, the labeling of the man as a
“dishonest manager”, is deeply tied to the perspective of the master.
Dr. Rossing points out that in our
day we look positively toward those who have accumulated wealth. But this was not the case in Jesus’ day.
When he realizes he is about to lose
his position, the action which this manger takes is to use his position and his
possessions in order to make friends for himself. Previously, he didn’t need to worry about who
he trampled on or who he offended with his business practices. He had an income and a position. What did he need with “friends”? He had money.
Of course it was the kind of money
that could be burned in a house fire or destroyed with a severe draught. It was the kind of wealth which could be
taken away, by robbers or by a fellow manager who was even more shrewd. But, hey – he was doing okay. Or so he thought. Until the rich man comes and tells him that
is going to be relieved of his livelihood.
He thought things were fine, till he looked around and began to wonder
if his life amounted to anything or if anyone really, truly cared about him.
And, so, he sets out on a course of
action which makes him rich in the eyes of his neighbors. He chooses a path for himself which will
assure him that as the temporary state of affairs changes, he will have
something which lasts.
Rossing also raises the question of
how the rich man reacts to what he sees.
The actions on the part of this manager deserve to be commended –
perhaps – because even the master realizes the wisdom of what the manager has
done. He commends the manager for doing
the right thing – maybe this means the master begins to reflect on his own ill
placed sense of security. Maybe, just
maybe, the actions of the dishonest manger exposed to the rich master how he
had used his wealth selfishly and to the detriment of others.
The manager realized that while he
may have had possessions he didn’t have what he needed the most. He acts shrewdly in order to correct the
situation. The master commends him, for
using that which was at his disposal in order to acquire that which would never
be taken away.
And then we get to those preach-able
lessons, in the final four verses.
“Whoever is faithful in very
little is faithful also in much.”
Jesus isn’t talking about we manage $20 as opposed to how we manage $2
million. The “very little” is any and
all of those things which are fleeting and easily stripped away from us. The “much” is our standing before God and the
way we care for and use the image of God imprinted upon us at creation.
In this way of seeing the story,
being faithful with “dishonest wealth” is a reference to any material
possessions. “True riches” are the gifts
of God, for the people of God.
Have we been faithful? With that which belongs to another? We were given and bear the image of God. How we handle that which has been given to us
surely ought to be taken into consideration when the possibility comes of
giving us that image of resurrected and heavenly beings.
You cannot serve two masters….. I don’t even want to read the final verse…..
you read it yourself.
Amen
No comments:
Post a Comment