Parable of the crafty steward

  • Thread starter Thread starter fin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, we have a very difficult teaching here. How does our Lord Jesus conclude this teaching. He says to the religious leaders who were covetous, ‘you can not serve God and mammon’. and they derided him.

The apostle Paul says that covetousness is ‘idolatry’.

Where else does our Lord Jesus say that we can not serve both God and mammon?

On the sermon on the mount. Our Lord says, “store not up treasures on earth, where moth and rust corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal. Rather, store up for your selves treasure in heaven, where neither moth nor rust corrupt, and where theives can not in and steal. For where your treasure is, there will be your heart also.” Our Lord then continues to explain about how the light of our eye must be singular, but if it is full of darkness, how great is that darkness.

We must not have eyes of covetousness, or desire to store up wealth on this earth. We must not serve mammon to be a disciple of our Lord Jesus Christ and a servant of God.

This is such a difficult teaching to obey in America.
 
Considering Catholic Social Teaching, Communism, Socialism and the Welfare State have all been condemned, while free enterprise and entrepreneurship have been lauded first by Christ in the Parables of the Dishonest Steward and The Talents, and by the Fathers of the Church, and by Popes.

Mt 19:16-21 refers to the rich young man becoming an Apostle “come follow Me”. Nowhere does Christ require him or mankind to give up all their possessions either to be good followers or to be able to enter heaven. If all were poor, how could anyone be helped?

Christ’s teaching on wealth and property
In his outstanding work Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 43-47, (with a new edition, since), Dr Alejandro Chafuen has examined carefully the teaching of Christ and wealth. Citing the case of the rich young man in Luke 18:18-25, Dr Chafuen remarks that many authors think that Jesus was condemning the possession of riches, but “the Late Scholastics indicated that this was not the correct interpretation. Citing Luke 14:26, where Jesus says, ‘If any man come to Me without hating his father, mother, wife, children, brothers, sisters, yes and his own life too, he cannot be My disciple,’ the Scholastics pointed out that this passage does not enjoin Christians to hate their fathers. Such doctrine would contradict the Fourth Commandment. Thomist and Scholastic interpretations of this passage is that the entrance to the kingdom of Heaven is denied to anyone who values things more than God. In Matthew’s Gospel (10:37), the same passage reads: ‘Anyone who prefers father or mother to Me is not worthy of Me. Anyone who prefers son or daughter to Me is not worthy of Me.’ It would be a violation of the natural order to value a created thing above its creator, as did the young ruler who pursued riches as his ultimate goal.”

As is indicated in Luke (12:29-31): “you must not set your heart on things to eat and things to drink; nor must you worry. It is the pagans of this world who set their hearts on all these things. Your father well knows you need them. No; set your hearts on His kingdom, and these other things will be given you as well.”

Dr Chafuen notes that “many people close to Jesus were quite wealthy for their times. Joseph seems to have had his own business and perhaps a donkey; Peter owned a fishing boat, and Matthew was a tax collector. Jesus praised the rich man Zaccheus. It was the wealthy Joseph of Arimathea who kept faith even when the Apostles were beset by doubt (Mt 27:57). Jesus does not condemn the possession of riches but, rather disordered attachment to them.” Notice also that Jesus did not ask His Apostles to renounce their property. Christians For Freedom, Ignatius 1986, p 45].
 
Clearly, all that Jesus Christ our Lord is saying is that ‘we can not serve both God and mammon’, and ‘we are in the world, but not of it’. , and “that where our treasure is, there will be our heart also.”

The apostle Paul says that ‘covetousness is idolatry’, and that 'the love of money is the root of all evil."

John the apostle says, “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world if anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life are not of the Father, but of the world. And the world is passing away with the lusts thereof, but he who does the will of God will abide forever.”

The parable of the crafty steward concludes with Jesus saying to the Pharisees who were covetous, “you can not serve both God and mammon.”

As I read this parable, Jesus was instructing his disciples to make friends of those of unrighteous mammon, in order to bring them into the kingdom. Jesus made friends with the chief publican of his day, Zacheus. Zacheus **repented **and gave half of his goods to the poor and fourfold to any whom he might have cheated.

Later, Zacheus is recorded to have become the first bishop of Caesarea of Palestine, certainly he did not remain a publican, neither did Matthew. As apostles and bishops they no doubt gave up all they had to follow Jesus Christ…as did the Jewish believers in Jerusalem who shared all things in common.

Each of us must ask ourselves where are heart is. Is it on the treasures of earth, or on the treasures of heaven? Are we serving God, or we serving mammon?
 
Gorgias,
“forgive us our trespasses as we reduce others”! is another way of saying I forgive half your debt. If I owed a department store $120 and they called me up and said “we are reducing your balance to half”, isn’t that the same as saying you are forgiven $60? And won’t I just think that manager is really a great guy, and if later He was at my door, wouldn’t I invite him in? (Every example limps a little.)

Jesus was praising him for his shrewdness of forgiving half which they took kindly and recepricated in kind. He knew how to make a bad situation into a good one where it was win win for everyone especially himself.

Now the point of the parable is not that he is cheating his boss by giving away his money, because that is wrong. No, that is just the set up for the story. The set up dosen’t have to be right or wrong, just the main point has to be right.

I’m in doubt whether one parable can be compared to another unless both are making the same point in the same way because “why make the same point over and over?”

Someone has mentioned the parable about the rich young man. In that case money was an issue in a different way, an obstacle to a higher calling for this man. It certainly dosen’t mean that man was rejecting Jesus because of riches, only that he did not accept an invitation to a greater vocation. And even after the refusal, the bible said that Jesus looked upon the young man with much love. It is about the sower who sowed seed, and some produced 100 fold, some 60 fold, and some less.
Jesus accepts this as every person’s right as long as they are doing good with their life.

Thanks for your response, and best wishes.
 
The parable might be about charity.

The point is not to copy the steward’s dishonest actions toward his master. The point may be that all our earthly goods are blessings from God (the master), and do not really belong to us (the stewards). By being charitable with these earthly goods we store up treasure in heaven.

Even though we are unrighteous sinners who don’t deserve salvation, giving charitably shows we honor God more than things of the earth. That fulfills the first commandment.
 
The unjust steward is, beyond question, the hardest of all our Lord’s parables, if we may argue from the number and variety of meanings set upon it. Verses 10-13 are no part of the narration but a discourse to which it gives rise. The connecting link between them is the difficult expression "mammon [more correctly ‘Mamon’] of iniquity "and we may suppose with Bengel that Christ was speaking to those of His followers, like Levi, who had been farmers of the taxes, i.e., “publicans”. In the contrast between the “children of this world” and the “children of light” we find a clue to the general lesson. Mark the resemblance to St. John’s Gospel in the opposition thus brought out. There are two generations or kinds of men—the worldling and the Christian; but of these one behaves with a perfect understanding of the order to which he belongs; the other often acts foolishly, does not put his talent to interest. How shall he proceed in the least Christian of all occupations, which is the handling of money? He must get good out of its evil, turn it to account for everlasting life, and this by alms-giving, “yet that which remaineth, give alms; and behold, all things are clean unto you” (Luke 11:41). The strong conclusion follows, which lies implicit in all this, “You cannot serve God and mammon” (Luke 16:13).
Click to expand...
A lack of wisdom has been shown by commentators who were perplexed that our Lord should derive a moral from conduct, evidently supposed unjust, on the steward’s part; we answer, a just man’s dealings would not have afforded the contrast which points the lesson–that Christians should make use of opportunities, but innocently, as well as the man of business who lets slip no chance. Some critics have gone farther and connect the hidden meaning with Shakespeare’s “soul of good in things evil”, but we may leave that aside. Catholic preachers dwell on the special duty of helping the poor, considered as in some sense keepers of the gates of Heaven, “everlasting tents”. St. Paul’s “faithful dispenser” (1 Corinthians 4:2) may be quoted here. The “measures” written down are enormous, beyond a private estate, which favors the notion of “publicani”. The Revised Version transforms “bill” happily into “bond”. It may be doubted which is “the lord” that commended the unjust steward. Whether we apply it to Christ or the rich man we shall obtain a satisfactory sense. “In their generation” should be “for their generation”, as the Greek text proves. St. Ambrose, with an eye to the dreadful scandals of history, sees in the steward a wicked ruler in the Church. Tertullian (De Fuga) and, long afterwards, Salmeron apply all to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles, who were indeed debtors to the law, but who should have been treated indulgently and not repelled. Lastly, there seems no ground for the widespread belief that “mammon” was the Phoenician Plutus, or god of riches; the word signifies “money.”
Click to expand...
Above From here: newadvent.org/cathen/11460a.htm
newadvent.org/summa/5018.htm (Article 4)
newadvent.org/fathers/101614.htm (Origin - see number 8)
newadvent.org/fathers/1801049.htm (Augustine - see number 9)
I’m sure there are plenty more mentions of it and insights on newadvent.org, but I don’t have time to find them all 🙂
 
The parable is directed to his disciples who gave up everything to follow Jesus Christ, and indirectly to the religious leaders who were trying to serve both God and mammon.

It would seem that in order to make friends with those of the mammon of unrighteousness, the disciples of our Lord were instructed to reach out to those with wealth and to encourage them to at least give a portion of their wealth to the Master of all, in order to be received into the kingdom of God.

Jesus gave his disciples this example in his dealings with Zacheus.

Clement of Alexandria writes about this parable in the same manner. He writes about everything one would want to know about wealth and the spiritual issues relating thereof.

newadvent.org/fathers/0207.htm
 
I think it is important to focus on the application of a parable, rather than the specifics.
For those who have trouble with the fact that Jesus commended the shrewd steward for what he did, consider this.

1**“At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release. 2And this is the manner of the release: every creditor shall release what he has lent to his neighbor. He shall not exact it of his neighbor, his brother, because the Lord’s release has been proclaimed.**
ESV (Deut.15:1-3).

Every 50 years (Jubillee) in Israel,there was even a more liberal forgiveness of debt, land and servitude. I find it interesting that according to Judaism, Yom Kippur of 2008 was a Jubilee year. This was the time of the great debt crisis in this country. It would have been a golden opportunity to have considered this option.
 
Have you checked out the alternative interpretation in the Cathar “Interrogatio Iohannis”? The crafty steward is interpreted as Satan.
 
fred_conty said:
Now the point of the parable is not that he is cheating his boss by giving away his money, because that is wrong. No, that is just the set up for the story. The set up dosen’t have to be right or wrong, just the main point has to be right.
Click to expand...
Fred,

I’m kinda confused about your point here. Are you saying that the set up is unjust (i.e., the steward cheats his master out of income), but that’s ok, since it’s just the set up and not the main point?

Blessings,

G.
 
My understanding is that in those days the steward received a commission on the materials he was stewarding for his master. So this steward, knowing he was about to be dismissed for poor service, chose to give up his commission in order to ingratiate himself with the master’s debtors. In this example he was not stealing from his master, he was taking a loss to maintain favourable relationships.
 
maggiedoc said:
My understanding is that in those days the steward received a commission on the materials he was stewarding for his master. So this steward, knowing he was about to be dismissed for poor service, chose to give up his commission in order to ingratiate himself with the master’s debtors. In this example he was not stealing from his master, he was taking a loss to maintain favourable relationships.
Click to expand...
I have heard that explanation too, but I don’t really like it. Jesus sometimes uses outrageous examples to make a point. God as an unjust judge, afraid a widow will come and beat him up? A “good shepherd” who loses a sheep, leaves the rest of the flock in the wilderness, and goes home to boast he lost a sheep? A king who writes off a $100,000,000 debt? Are those any harder to accept than approval of a cheating steward?

If we make the parables too smooth and logical, they lose their sharp appeal.
 
The parable suggests that, Jesus’ target audiences are people who love money, broadly classified into two types – Pharisees (children of light) who amass wealth through legally right ways but are tightfisted with their hard-earned money and “children of this world” who are corrupt and adopt dishonest means to make money but liberally use their ill-gotten wealth for gaining favors and friends. The former are advised to learn from the latter to freely use money to gain the friendship of saints who will welcome them into “eternal dwellings” when wealth fails to gain them salvation. The latter are advised to learn from the former to give up dishonest ways and are gently wooed to receive their very own heavenly treasures after proving trustworthy with what belongs to others. Both are urged to break free from the love of money and seek God with an undivided heart which is far more important than mere honesty and generosity, for the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs. (1Tim 6:10)
 
Pitcharan said:
The parable suggests that, Jesus’ target audiences are people who love money, broadly classified into two types – Pharisees (children of light) who amass wealth through legally right ways but are tightfisted with their hard-earned money and “children of this world” who are corrupt and adopt dishonest means to make money but liberally use their ill-gotten wealth for gaining favors and friends.
Click to expand...
Hmm… I don’t know that I’ve ever taken the meaning in that way. Rather, it seems that Jesus knows that his “target audience” is familiar with those ‘children of this world’ who “adopt dishonest means to make money”; hence, Jesus advises them that, in a similar way, they should be as “cunning as serpents”. That is, just as the ‘children of this world’ keep their minds focused on their goal (i.e., acquisition of wealth, and being welcomed into houses in which they can further their chase for wealth), those who hear Jesus’ message should keep their minds focused on their goal (attainment of everlasting life), so that they might be welcomed into eternal houses…
 
I would have to agree with Pitcharan.

There are the religious leaders of the days of Jesus where wealth was considered a blessing from God. Then there were the tax collectors who were judged by the religious leaders for collecting wealth through unrighteous methods.

The story of Jesus reaching out to Zacheus, the chief publican, and how Jesus was judged by the religious leaders for associating with Zacheus is a good example of both.

Jesus’ parable then, is one where he is teaching his disciples to make friends with those who have gained unrighteous mammon by suggesting that they do not have to give up **everything **to the Master. On the other hand, he is also speaking to the Pharisees who were covetous, and telling them that they can not serve both God and mammon.
 
mercytruth said:
I would have to agree with Pitcharan.

There are the religious leaders of the days of Jesus where wealth was considered a blessing from God. Then there were the tax collectors who were judged by the religious leaders for collecting wealth through unrighteous methods.
Click to expand...
Interesting how the old heresies and bad spiritual ideas never seem to disappear entirely. How many evangelists today preach that, if you are loved by God, he will make you rich?
 
bmonk,

This was a Jewish perception that was based in large measure on patriarchs such as Abraham and Job. This is why it was so incomprensible for the disciples of Jesus to hear that it is difficult for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. This was completely foreign to their understanding. Obedience to God was equivalent to being blessed in the here and now.
 
mercy truth, I agree–but I always find it interesting how the best heresies and errors usually have appeared before. True, often not in exactly the same form, but still recognizable.

There is a group of evangelicals, especially in the media, who preach that if God loves you, you will prosper and become rich. Not sure what they say about Matthew 8:20 and similar verses, where Jesus has “nowhere to lay his head.”
 
yes, there are such individuals who have a prosperity message based on faith, a faith that is defined as believing God’s word. Being poor, or sick is due to the lack of faith from their perspective. It is even worse when such preachers ask for a seed of faith donation that will be the first step in curing whatever ails the listener, or in getting them out of poverty. Unfortunately, they are very selective as to the word of God that they preach.

'Denying oneself, taking up one’s cross daily, and following Jesus" is not very popular.

Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy… for we are all sinners.
 
“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”

The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight.

For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs***. (Lk 16:13-15 & 1Tim 6:10)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top