PRODIGAL SON - 4th Sunday of Lent (Cycle C)

Homily for the 4^th Sunday of Lent (Cycle C)

Based on Lk 15:1-3, 11-32(Gospel), Jos 5:9-12(First Reading) and  2 Co 5:17-21(Second Reading)

From the Series: “Reflections and Teachings of the Desert”

PRODIGAL SON

‘I am wandering like a lost sheep; come and look for your servant…’ (Ps 119:176)

The Gospel for this 4^th Sunday of Lent (Cycle C) is from  Lk 15:1-3, 11-32. Verse 1 says: The tax collectors and sinners, meanwhile, were seeking his company to hear what he had to say,

Parallel texts are:

1.       Lk 6:36 - Be compassionateas your Father is compassionate.

2.       Ex 34:6 - Yahweh passed before him and proclaimed:^cYahweh Yahweh, a God of tenderness and compassion, slow to anger and rich in kindness  and faithfulness.  Footnote ^c says “Yahweh fulfills his promise, 33:19-23 and reveals his divine attributes, most particularly his loving kindness.”

3.       Ho 2:21 -I will betroth^q you to me forever:betroth you with integrity and justice, with tenderness^r and love.Footnote ^q says “God takes back his unfaithful wife with the fervor of first love, and showers her (cfGn 24:53; 34:12) with spiritual gifts”; and Footnote ^r says “The primary meaning of this word (hesed) is that of a bond, or contract. When used of human relationship, union, loyalty, especially when there are the outcome of a treaty. Used of God, the term means his faithfulness to his covenant and the kindness he therefore shows his chosen people (in Ex 34:6). Used by Hosea in the context of married love, the word assumes and from then on retains a still warmer significance: it means the tender love God has for his people, Ps 136; Jer 31:3; etc., and the benefits deriving from it, Ex 20:6; Dt 5:10; 2 S 22:51; Jr 32:18; Ps 18:50. But this divine hesed calls for corresponding hesed in man (Ho 6:6), consisting of self-giving, loving trust, abandonment, deep affection, ‘piety’, a love (in short) which is joyful submission to the will of God and an active charity to fellowmen, Ho 4:2; 6:6. This ideal, expressed in many of the Psalms, will later be that of the Hasidim, or ‘Hasidaeans’, cf 1 M 2:42+.”

4.       Ho 11:8-9 - Ephraim, how could I part with you?, Israel, how could I give you up? How could I treat you like Admah, ordeal with you like Zeboiim?^kMy heart recoils from it, my whole being trembles at the thought^l (v. 8). I will not give rein to my fierce anger, I will not destroy Ephraim again, for I am God and not a man: I am the Holy One in your midst  and have no wish to destroy.^mFootnote^k says“Admah and Zeboiim were two of the five towns of the Pentapolis, Gn 10:19; 14:2,8, Dt 29:22; in the Elohistic tradition they presumably take the place of the Sodom and Gomorrah of the Yahwistic tradition, Is 1:9-10”; Footnote ^l says “Lit. ‘My heart recoils within me, my bowels are in a ferment’”; Footnote and ^m says “‘I have no wish to destroy’ corr.; ‘I shall not come into the town’ Hebr.”

5.       Ps 119:176 - I am wandering like a lost sheep;^u come and look for your servant, No, I have never forgotten your commandments.Footnote^u  says  “The ‘lost sheep’ theme of the prophets, Ezk 34:1+, is here applied to the individual.”

Verse 2 says:  and the Pharisees and scribes complained. “This man’ the said, ‘welcomes sinners and eats with them.”

Parallel text is Lk 19:7 that says: They all complained when they saw what was happening. “He has gone to stay at a sinner’s house” they said.

Verses 3 says: So he spoke this parable to them:

Parallel text is Mt 9:10-13 that says: While he was at dinner in his house, it happened that anumber of tax collectors and sinners^e came to sit at the table with Jesus and his disciples (v. 10). When the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, “Why does your master eat with tax collectors and sinners?” (v. 11). When he heard this he replied, “It is not the healthy  who need a doctor, but the sick do (v.12). Go and learn the meaning of the words: What I want is mercy, not sacrifice.’^fAnd indeed I did not come to call the virtuous but sinners (v. 13).’   Footnote ^e says “Those whose moral conduct or disreputable profession, cf. 5:46+, rendered ‘unclean’ and socially outcast”; and Footnote ^f says “To the exact performance of the Law’s external  demands God prefers the inward quality of genuine compassion. It is a favorite theme of the prophets, Am 5:21+.”

Verses 11, 12 and 13 say: He also said, “A man had two sons,The younger son said to his father, ‘Father, let me have the share of the estate that would come to me.’ So the father divided the property between them.A few days later, the younger son got together everything he had and left for a distant country where he squandered his money on a life of debauchery.

Parallel text for verse 13 are:

1.       Pr 27:3 - Heaviness of stone, and weight of sand, heavier than both: annoyances from a fool.

2.       Si 9:6 - Do not give your souls to whores, or  you ruin your inheritance.

Verses 14, 15 and 16 say:  When he had spent it all, that country experienced a severe famine, and now he began to feel the pinch.So he hired himself out to one of the local inhabitants who put him on his farm to feed the pigs.And he would willingly have filled his belly with husks the pigs were eating but no one offered him anything.

Parallel text is Pr 27:7 that says:The gorgedthroat revolts at honey;the hungrythroat finds all bitterness sweet.

Verse 18 says: Then he came to his senses and said, ‘How many of my father’s paid servants have more food than they want, but here I am dying of hunger.

Parallel text is  Zc 10:9 that says:I have scattered them among the peoples but from far away they will remember me (they will teach their sons, and these will return).^h Footnote ^h says “‘have scattered’ corr.: ‘will scatter’ Hebr. ‘will teach’ corr.; ‘will rear’.”

Verse 18 says: I will leave this place and go to my father and say: “Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you;

Parallel text is  Ho 2:9 that says:  She will chase after her lovers, and never catch up with  them;she will search for them and never find them. Then she will say,“I will go back^f to my first husband,I was happier then than I am today.”Footnote ^f says“The Baals, Canaanite gods of fertility to whom the Israelites offered the produce of their soil, which they believed came as much from the gods of Canaan as from Yahweh.”

Verses 19 and 20 say: I no longer deserve to be called your son; treat me as you would treat one of your paid servants.’So he left the place and went back to his father. While he was still a long way off, his father saw him and was moved with pity.^a He ran to the boy, clasped him in his arms and kissed him tenderly. Footnote ^a says“The father’s pity symbolizes divine mercy; it contrasts with the elder son’s resentment which is like that of the Pharisees and scribes.”

Parallel texts for verse 29 are:

1.       Tb 7:6 - Raguel leaped to his feet, and kissed him and wept.

2.       Jr 3:12f  -So go, and shout these words toward the North: Come back, disloyal Israel—it is Yahweh who speaks—Ishallfrownon  you^j no more; since I am merciful-it is Yahweh who speaks - I will not keep my resentment forever. Footnote ^j  says“‘you’ (sing.) corr.: ‘you’ (plur. ) Hebr.”

3.       Is 49:14-16 - For Zion was saying, “Yahweh has abandoned me, the Lord has forgotten me’ (v.14). Does a woman forget her baby at her breast, or fail to cherish the son of her womb? Yet even if these forget, I will never^h forget you (v. 15). See, I Have branded you upon the palms of my hands, your ramparts are always under my eyes.Footnote  ^h  says “Admirable summing up of the message of Hosea, Jeremiah and the Deuteronomist, who had already affirmed this unfailing love of Yahweh for Israel, Cf. 54:8+.”

4.       Jr 31:20 - Is Ephraim, then, so dear a son to me, a child so favored, that after each threat of mine, I must still remember him, still be deeply moved for him,  and ley my tenderness yearn over him? It is Yahweh who speaks.

Verses 21 and 22 say: Then his son said, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and against you; I no longer deserve to be called your son.’But the father said to his  servants, ‘Quick! Bring out the best robe and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet.

Parallel texts are:

1.       Ba 5:1-2 - Jerusalem, take off your dress of sorrow and distress, put on the beauty of the glory of God forever, Wrap the cloak of the integrity of God around you, put the diadem of the glory of the Eternal on your head;

2.       Is 49:22 - Thus speaks the Lord Yahweh: I beckon to the nations and hoist my signal for the people.^k They will bring back your sons in the cloak,^l they will take your daughters on their shoulders.Footnote ^k says “In 5:26, this signal called in the invader, now it proclaims salvation”;  and Footnote ^l says  “As babes are tenderly carried. “

Verses 23, 24, 25, 26 and 27 say: Bring the calf  we have been fattening and kill it;  we aregoing to have a feast,a celebration, because this son of mine was dead, and has come back to life; he was lost and is found.” And began to celebrate.Now the older son was out in the field and, on his way back, as he drew near the house, he could hear music and dancing.Calling one of the servants, he asked what it was all about.“Your brother has returned”replied the servant, “and your father has killed the calf  he had fattened because he has got him back safe and sound.”

Parallel text for verse 24 is Lk 19:10 Lk 19:10 that says: For the Son of Man has come to seek out and to save what was lost.”

Verses 28, 29, 30 and 31 say: He was angry and refused to go in, his father came out to plead with him.

He said to his father in reply, ‘Look, all these years I have slaved for you and never once disobeyed your orders; yet you never offered me so much as a kid for me to celebrate with my friends.But for this  son yours, when he comes back after swallowing up your property- he and his women-you kill the calf we have been fattening.’The father said, ‘My son, you are here with me always; everything I have is yours.

Parallel text for verse 28 is from Jon 4:1  that says: Jonah was very indignant at this, he fell into arage.

Verse 32 says: But it was only right we should celebrate and rejoice, because your brother here was dead and has come to life; he was lost and is found.

Parallel text are:

1.       Lk 1:14 - He will be your joy and delight and many will rejoiceⁱ at his birth Footnote ⁱ  says “Joy is the keynote of ch. 1-2; 1:28,46,58; 2:10. Cf 10:17,20f; 13:17; 15:7,32; 19:6,17; 24:41,5. Ac 2:46+.”

2.       Ezk 18:23 - What! Am I likely to take pleasure in the death of a wicked man—it is the Lord Yahweh who speaks - not prefer to see to see him renounce his wickedness and live?

3.       Ezk 33:11 - Say to them, ‘As I live – it is the Lord Yahweh who speaks – I take pleasure, not  in the death of the wicked man, but in the turning back of a wicked man who changes his ways to win life. Come back, come back from your evil ways. Why are you so anxious to die, House of Israel?’

4.       Lk 19:10 - For the Son of Man has come to seek out and to save what was lost.”

The First Reading is from Jos 5:9-12. Verses 9, 10 and 11 say: And Yahweh said to Joshua: ‘Today I have taken the shame of Egypt^c from you.’  Hence that place has been called Gilgal until now.^dThe Israelites pitched  their camp at Gilgal kept the Passover there on the fourteenth day of the month  at evening in the plain of Jericho.On the morrow of  the Passover they tasted the produce of that country, unleavened cakes and ears of corn that same day.Footnote^c  says “The ‘shame that lies  in being uncircumcised, as the author believes the Egyptians were”; and Footnote ^d says “Play on words: Gilgal is connected with galal (to take, or roll, away).”

Parallel text is from 1 S 17:26that says: Then David asked the men who were standing near him: “What reward will the man have who kills this Philistine and removes the disgracefrom Israel? Who is this uncircumcised Philistine who dares insult the armies of the living God?”

Verse 12 says:  From that time, from their first eating of the produce of that country, the manna stopped falling. And having manna no longer, the Israelites fed from that year on what the  land of Canaan yielded.^e Footnote ^e  says“The eating of the unleavened bread and roasted corn (marking the arrival of Israel in an agricultural country) took on a religious character because of the Passover, which in turn required circumcision. The ceasing of the manna indicated that desert period was over.

Parallel text is from Ex 16:1”.

The Second Reading is from 2 Co 5:17-21. Verses 17 and 18 say: And for anyone who is in Christ, there is a new creation;^fthe old creation has gone, and now the new one is here.^gIt is all God’s work. It was God who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the work of handing on this reconciliation. Footnote^f says “God who created all things through Christ, cf. Jn 1;3, has restored his work, deformed by sin, by re-creating it in Christ, Col 1:15-20+. The central figure of this ‘new creation’, here and Ga 6:15- which extends to the whole universe, Col 1:19+; cf. 2 P 3:13; Rv 21:1 – is the ‘new man’ created in Christ, EP 2:15+, to lead a new life, Rm 6:4, of virtue and holiness, Ep 2:10; 4;24+; Col 3:10+. Cf. the ‘new birth’ of baptism, Rm 6:4+;  andFootnote^g  says “Var. ‘all is new’”.

Parallel texts are:

1.       Is 43:19 - See, I am doing a new deed, even now it comes to light; can you not seeit? Yes, I am making a road in the wilderness, paths^hin the wild.Footnote^f says “God who created all things through Christ, cf. Jn 1;3, has restored his work, deformed by sin, by re-creating it in Christ, Col 1:15-20+. The central figure of this ‘new creation’, here and Ga 6:15- which extends to the whole universe, Col 1:19+; cf. 2 P 3:13; Rv 21:1 – is the ‘new man’ created in Christ, EP 2:15+, to lead a new life, Rm 6:4, of virtue and holiness, Ep 2:10; 4;24+; Col 3:10+. Cf. the ‘new birth’ of baptism, Rm 6:4+”; and Footnote  ^g says “Var. ‘all is new’.”

2.       Mt 9:16 - No one puts a piece of unshrunken cloth on to an old cloak, because  the patch pulls away from the cloak and the tear gets worse.

3.       Ep 2:10 - We are God’s work of art, created in Christ Jesus to live the good life as from the beginning he had meant us to live it.

4.       Heb 8:13 - By speaking of a new covenant, he implies that the first one is already old. Now anything old only gets more antiquated until in the end it disappears.

5.       Rm 5:10 - When we were reconciled to God by   the death of his Son, Indeed, if, we were still enemies;now that we had been reconciled, surely we may count on being saved by the life of his Son.

Verses 18, 19 and 20 say:It is all God’s work. It was God who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the work of handing on this reconciliation.In other words, God in Christ was reconciling the world to himself, not holding men’s faults against them and he has entrusted to us the news that they are reconciled.So we are ambassadors for Christ, it is as though God was appealing through us, and the appeal that we make in Christ’s name is: be reconciled to God.

Parallel text for verse 19 isJn 3:17 that says: For God sent his Son into the world not to condemn the world, but so that through him the world might be saved.

Verse 21 says: For our sake he made the sinless one into sin,^hso that in him we might become the goodness of God. Footnote ^hsays “By a kind of  legal fiction, God identified Jesus with sin so that he might bear the curse incurred by sin, Ga. 3:13; Rm 8:3.”

Parallel texts are:

1.       Is 53:5-8 - Yet he was pierced through for our faults, crushed for our sins. On him lies a punishment that brings us peace, and through his wounds we are healed (v. 5). We had all gone astray like sheep, each taking his own way; and Yahweh burdened him with the sins of us all(v. 6). Harshly dealt with, he bore it humbly, he never opened his mouth, like a lamb that is led to the slaughterhouse, like a sheep dumbed before its shearers, never opening his mouth (v. 7). By force and by law, he was taken^d, would anyone plead his cause?^e Yet, he was torn away from the land of the living; for our^f faults struck down in death (v.8)Footnote ^dsays“Suggesting that the servant has been condemned by process of law”;Footnote ^esays“‘cause’ corr.; ‘generation’, ‘descent’ Hebr. Interpretation uncertain. The ‘who will explain his descent?’ of the Greek and Lat. Has been taken by Christian tradition to refer to the mysterious origin of Christ; the Hebr. dor( a generation) cannot however bear this sense; and Footnote  ^f  says“‘our’ corr.; ‘of my people’ Hebr.”

2.       Rm 8:3 - God has done what the Law, because of our unspiritual nature, was unable to do. ^c God dealt with sin by sending his own Son in a body as physical as any sinful body, and in that body ^d God condemned sin.Footnote ^csays“The mosaic Law, imposed from without, could not be an inward principle of salvation, 7:7+. Christ alone, who by his death destroyed our unspiritual nature (lit. ‘flesh’) in his own person, could destroy sin whose domain the ‘flesh’ was. Man formerly carnal is now, though union with Christ, spiritual”; andFootnote  ^dsays “Lit. ‘in the likeness of sinful flesh and in that flesh…’

3.       Ga 3:13 - Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law by being cursed for our sake,^e since scripture says: Cursed be everyone who is hanged on a tree.Footnote ^esays“To free the human race from the curse God laid on it for defying the law, Christ made himself answerable for the curse, cf. Rm 8:3+; 2 Co 5:21; Col 2:14+. The somewhat remote analogy between the crucified Christ and the criminal of Dt 21:23 is used merely to illustrate this doctrine.”

4.       1 P. 2:24 - He bearing our faults in his own body on the cross, so that we might die to our faults, we live for holiness; through his wounds you have been healed.

5.       1 Jn 3:5- Now you know that he appeared in order to abolish sin,^c and that in him there is no sin…Footnote ^c says“Lit. ‘sins’; var. ‘our sins’”.

DOCTRINE ON LUKE 15:1-32

(The Three Parables of God’s Mercy and Compassion)

1.       Like the other Bible Study No. 12 wherein the evangelist Luke (Lk. 13:1-9) exposed the hardheadedness of the Jews to the call for repentance, their unbelief in the teachings of Christ and refusal to accept the light or truth coming from others, especially from Christ, whom they called as an impostor and a friend of the devil, here in Lk 15:1-32, which is the topic for today, focuses on the attitude of the religious leaders of te Jews: the scribes and the Pharisees.

2.       Who are these people? Why are they the enemies of Christ? On page 2 of our Bible Study No. 12-A, there is a footnote on Ex. 34:6+ (also in Ho 2:21 above) concerning the Hasidim o Hasideans of 1 M 2:42+. The Hasidims were the parents of the Pharisees (‘perusim’ – separated) during the time of Jesus. The Pharisees were the Jewish religious confraternity composed of the scribes, the doctors of the Law and priests whose membership reached 6,000 persons. Their distinguishing mark from the rest of the other Jewish sects like the “Essenes” (mystics or hermits) and the Sadducees, is their zeal or eagerness for the Law upto its minutest details which they believed should not be broken by anyone. Because if this belief, they acknowledged themselves as the holiest among all the Jews because they are strict in observing the minutest details of the Law (See Mt. 23:13-32, Mk. 12:38-40, Lk. 20:45-47). They are devoted to the living oral traditions. Because of their knowledge on the Law, some of them destroy the will of God by putting them under human traditions (Mt. 15:1-20), looked down upon the ignorant people because of their self-righteousness (Lk. 18:11m) and obstruct those who wanted to relate with sinners and the publicans thus limit God’s love according to their own limited understanding. It is said there in Acts 23:6-9 that the Pharisees are different from the Sadducees because of their belief in the resurrection of the dead, the existence of angels and spirits.

Meanwhile, the scribes, whose majority are members of the Pharisees, are the writers (Ps. 45:1), translators and custodians  of the Law. Hence, they are recognized as custodians and interpreters of the scriptures to the people (Ezra 7:6+. Ne. 8:8+). While they explain the scriptures, many scribes (grammatel) are priests who are considered as guardians of the traditions that are preserved in the texts of Holy Scriptures (Cf Jr. 8:8+). They are most of the time officials of the oriental courts (Ne. 8:8+) because of their exceptional abilities in the art of writing, ministers, envoys, teachers (rabbi like Ezra), or priests in the Temple (Sir. 39:2+, 5+). As Pharisees (like Paul – Phil. 3:5), they also believe in the resurrection of the dead (Lk. 20:39). Why they are enemies of Jesus Christ is because they follow human traditions which they want people to strictly follow and are more important  than the true teachings of God, such as God’s goodness and mercy for sinners which i sour theme for today.

3.       Jesus’ teaching is the opposite of the teachings of the scribes and the Pharisees (Mt. 23:1), especially in accepting and relating with sinners and publicans. The scribes and Pharisees’ attitude towards them was what the evangelist Luke was pointing out that God does not approve and even hate this attitude of the scribes and the Pharisees. For Luke, it is clear that Jesus do not agree with the scribes and Pharisees. The basis for saying this is the three parables of God’s mercy and compassion, especially the Parable on the Prodigal Son.

4.       In today’s gospel for the 4th Sunday of Lent (Cycle C), concerning the Prodigal Son, these two characters are being clearly shown to us: first, the character of being a saint, and, secondly, the character of being truly a son of God.

In the parable of Jesus Christ about the Prodigal Son, it turns out that the character and personality of being a saint is being portrayed in the image of eldest son, while the character and personality of being a son of God is being portrayed by the youngest son who squandered the property and inheritance of his parent.

In the entirety of Jesus Christ’s story, which of these two sons are appreciated and being considered as the true child of the father and by God? Let us study the two kinds of character that are being presented in the story so that we could get the right answer.

The character of the eldest son who was the saint:

According to the story of Jesus’ parable, he was presenting the character of a saintly person in the image of the eldest son of the father. This eldest son did not even have the courage to leave his father’s house, become a vagabond, become a head-ache of a problem to his parent. In short, this eldest son was a model and example of a good child of a parent: obedient, dependable, trustworthy, disciplined in work and in life, did not go with bad friends, did not think of marrying, or womanize, had no bad habits or any fault ot defects in life, and many others.

 But when he had the opportunity to speak up of his deep feelings inside himself, he called his father a “master.” Let us listen to what he said: “‘Look, in my entire life I slaved for you and did not break any of your wishes, but you did not even offer a small kid so that I could celebrate with my friends. But when this worthless son of yours returned, who squandered your property on loose women, you even ordered the fattened calf  to be slaughtered” (Lk. 15:29-30).              

In these words that were spoken by the eldest son, what did Jesus Christ want us to learn about the personality and character of this eldest son (the scribes and Pharisees who were self-righteous and considered themselves “saints”)?

Jesus Christ wants to show that the true character of this eldest son, on the outside, he was showing us a picture of a good son, but on the deeper side of himself, he was so full of hatred, disgust, rebelliousness and anger against his father. He regarded himself, because of his position and standing in the family as one who is serving his parent, was that he was not a loved son endeared to his father, but a slave who was obedient to every command and wishes of his father.  He thought that the property that was left with his parent was not truly his  own because he was not free to slaughter even a kid under his care for his own enjoyment.

Therefore, it was clear that the motive for all his services, enslaving and not going away from the home of his father, was that his part of the inheritance was not yet given t him, unlike what the younger son did, who ran away from his father, and enjoyed his life. Hence, this good child, deep inside himself, was thinking that he was not a true child, but only a slave, a servant, his father.

The character of the younger child who squandered the property of his father (the sinners and the publicans who ate with Jesus Christ):

The character of a true son of God, according to this parable of Jesus Christ, was being portrayed in the second child, the younger son who squandered the property and inheritance of his parents.

This second child shamelessly asked for the share his inheritance, even if his parents were still alive and well. But after he received his share of the inheritance, he went very far away from his family. In the place where he eloped, he lived a prodigal life, going to the beer houses nightly, womanized, gambled, made friends, and lived a life of extravagance and luxury. But the time came when all his money was spent on his vices, his women and his gambling, and he hired himself to a pigpen owner, who did not give him his salary or gave him anything to eat. In the midst of all his sufferings, he thought of his former situation with his father and elder brother at their house.

He said to himself, “How many hired hands does father employ who have plenty of food to eat, but here I am dying of hunger. I will leave this place and return to my father and say to him: My father, I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer fit to be called your son, but treat me as one of your hired servants”. Henceforth, he left the miserable place and returned to his father (Lk. 15:17-20).

What did Jesus Christ want us to understand through the words that was said by the youngest son? In front of the goodness of the father, from the beginning up to the end of the story, he was shameless, wasting the livelihood of his family, squandered his family inheritance in loose living like vices, womanizing, gambling, indulging in illicit enjoyments and extravagant living, the kind of life he had not experienced while he was under the charge of his father and elder brother. But in all these sins, he was able to recognize the goodness of his father and true repentance for all what he had done when he was far away from his father, that is why he said to his father “Do not treat me as a son any longer but a hired servant.”

This was the opposite of what the elder son said to his father that “Look, in my entire life I slaved for you and did not break any of your wishes”. But the youngest son, due to the gravity of his sins and wrongdoings against his parent, said, “From no on, do not treat me as a son any longer but a hired servant.”

This means that, the previous son who has no longer anything to expect as an inheritance from the property of his family, because he had already spent everything in prodigality and loose living, he will start to eat at the table of his father as a worker who will earn his keep that will be paid to him by his father.

…feeling of the prodigal (the lost) son to God (the father). While the scribes and Pharisees who are children of God (the eldest son) who did not leave the house, throughout their entire life had sacrificed themselves (worked for holiness and righteousness), but their attitude to God was that he was a dictator, and not like a father, who was strict and vengeful. Hence, they were good and did not go away and avoided committing sin against God, because they were afraid of him and his punishment, or from the inheritance that they will lose if they break away with God. Hence, the eldest son said in the parable that ‘Look, in my entire life I slaved for you and did not break any of your wishes…” There, he treated himself under the roof of his father was that he was not a son but a slave of his father, and his view of his father was that he was minding too much the life of another. That is why, for the scribes and Pharisees, God is bad and not good because he was strict and harsh in his commands.  Hence, all the goodness (riches) of God that were already allotted for them as their inheritance, they still had hard feelings against God (the father) because in his harshness he omitted  to permit his eldest son to enjoy himself by giving him even a single goat from the father’s property so that he could celebrate with his friends.  But when the younger brother returned who had spent the property (inheritance) of his father on loose living, the harsh father even had the fattened calf slaughtered (the eldest son was so materialistic that he still wanted to have a share in the fattened cow – like the Pharisees and scribes who felt bad against Jesus Christ because he ate with the sinners and the food they took did not even come from them). They even refused to enter the father’s house and waited for the time until the father himself cameo out and left the visitors and the celebration inside just to talk to him (eldest son). The attitude of the scribes and Pharisees were truly bad according to Jesus Christ here. But, throughout all this, what was teh attitude of the father (God)? From beginning to end of the parable, the father (God) showed his being good and not harsh like what the eldest son thought about him. He showed his mercy in meeting the prodigal son still far from the house and by giving the three signs of being a legitimate family member, which are the cloak, the ring and the shoes, after spending all his inheritance in loose living away from his true family. He showed his being a rich father when he celebrated the return of his younger son, even if he has no more money because he already divided all his property to his two sons. That is why, the fattened calf, including all the servants inside the house)  that was slaughtered were no longer the property of the father. If the feeling of the eldest son was hurt and he complained, still the father (God) displayed his tenderness towards his younger son because he thought that the eldest son already owned all the money and property of the family and what if he died and rested already? Hence, we must also pity the father (God) here in the story because in his great goodness he suffered much from the hands of both his sons (the sinners and those who thought themselves holy or righteous), Jesus Christ said. In this situation, the father had no choice, he was always considered bad and faulted both by the sinner and by the saintly persons. The father said, “My son, you are always with me, and all that I have are already yours, but it is just right and fitting that we should celebrate today because this brother of yours who turned his back away from me as his life, now he has returned to me”.  

5.       A parent is always considered bad, from the point of view of both the good and the bad child. But the good that happened in this story is that the parent was given the opportunity to become like God (the father in the story) in his being good from the beginning to the end of life.  A parent must always strive to be good always despite the change of attitude of his children(those who are good today may become bad later, and vice versa)

6.       Esoterically, the Parable of the Prodigal Son may be explained  in this following manner: The beauty of the life in the garden of Eden (Paradise) is being pictured in Jesus Christ’ parable about the Prodigal Son (Lk. 15:11-32). God has a plantation (Jer. 12:7-15) that was to be his inheritance to his two sons. His eldest son are the angels. The younger son are the human beings. The angels are his servants and messengers in his house (the Elder son in the parable story). Man was placed by God in the garden (Paradise) for him to manage it (the younger son in the parable story). God, the angels and man was living a happy and contented life inside this plantation of God. But, it did not take long that the younger son (man) sold all his inheritance in his father’s plantation to the Devil, or to Satan (who was also an Archangel who was driven out from the plantation) so that he could live a loose life on earth (the materialization or the dressing up in a skin of flesh like a man). Here, in a clothing of flesh, he squandered his divine inheritance in an evil, sinful and mortal kind of life. After reflecting about his wrong decision, he returned back to his father. His father (God) gave him back whatever good that still  remained inside his house (the precious cloak, the ring and the shoes), that are signs that he was restoring the divine or heavenly rights to his vagabond child. The Elder son and the servants (the angels) complained because the father restored the former happiness inside his home for man because he caused the fattening calf to be killed (Jesus Christ who was crucified and killed on the cross), and the feast (happiness in heaven for the repentant sinner). The elder son (the angels) had a hurt feelings against God (the father) because Jesus Christ was not given for them but to man who squandered the riches and inheritance of God, which is eternal life.

7.   God’s answer to the complaint of the angels is this: “My son, do not complain because everything that is left inside this plantation are yours; but it is just right and fitting that we should celebrate because your father (God) was rejected by your younger brother but now he has returned to me alive and well.” 
8. Welcoming back the prodigal son depends extraordinarily on the mercy and compassion of the father; however, in the normal and ordinary way, mercy and compassion among human beings is very hard to find. Hence the parable of the Prodigal Son is a story about an ideal situation ( a paradigm of an ideal human behavior)  and therefore human beings find this story very appealing to their noble senses.