Was zacheus a virtuous man?

[hilarycotter]

We read in yesterday’s gospel about Zacheus who the Lord invited to dinner with him.

I suspect that Zacaheus was not one of the tax collectors who gave tax collectors a bad game. He repents from his (unnamed sins), and he says (Luke 19:8) “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”"

From penitents.org/frdzacheus.html we read "Incidentally this is, according to the Law of Moses, the greatest act of restitution that one can do. "

Suppose he was a tax collector who was extorting money - this means that he would have given away 1/2 of what he stole, and then 4 times that which he illegally stole. So if he stole $1000, he would give away $500+$4000, which means he would have given away $4500 for a theft of $1000.

To me there are three possibilities - he went into debt to pay it back, he had an inheritance, or he did not steal anything in the first place.

I am wondering if any of you can comment on this!

 

[Reepicheep]

A fourth possibility is that he was mostly honest but was aware of having committed some few acts of cheating, for which he now planned to make restitution.

A fifth possibility is that he had a clear conscience but was making a promise to the Lord, of honest behavior.

 

[Orogeny]

Well, Jesus certainly seemed satisfied with his actions, so I think that however he came about his wealth, his penance was proper.

Peace

Tim

 

[TMC]

We read in yesterday’s gospel about Zacheus who the Lord invited to dinner with him.

Is your question whether he was eventually virtuous or whether he was virtuous when Jesus first called to him and asked to stay at his house? I ask because some claim that Jesus did not associate with sinners but only with the repentant. They use this interpretation to justify shunning and other rejections of those they believe are less holy than themselves. To me, if you read from Luke 19:1-10, the context makes clear that Jesus ate with Zacheus precisely to show that He came for sinners and righteous alike, and that it is by interacting with those we think of as ‘sinners’ that we do His will, not by pushing them away.

Or maybe that wasn’t your question at all.

 

[hilarycotter]

I thought He dined with him because he was an outcast, not necessarily because he was a repentant sinner.

I have no problem with Christ associating with sinners, after all he associates with me

 

[Linuse]

What about another possibility. Tax collectors in the public’s mind were thought to be sinners even it they actually were good people. Is Jesus showing acceptance then even of those whom society has named sinners?
Zaccheus’ statement “If I have…” seems to indicate that he thought of himself as an honest person and not a sinner–at least in regards to how he collected Taxes.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

We read in yesterday’s gospel about Zacheus who the Lord invited to dinner with him.

I suspect that Zacaheus was not one of the tax collectors who gave tax collectors a bad game. He repents from his (unnamed sins), and he says (Luke 19:8) “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”"

From penitents.org/frdzacheus.html we read "Incidentally this is, according to the Law of Moses, the greatest act of restitution that one can do. "

Suppose he was a tax collector who was extorting money - this means that he would have given away 1/2 of what he stole, and then 4 times that which he illegally stole. So if he stole $1000, he would give away $500+$4000, which means he would have given away $4500 for a theft of $1000.

To me there are three possibilities - he went into debt to pay it back, he had an inheritance, or he did not steal anything in the first place.

I am wondering if any of you can comment on this!

HALF of what he OWNED was given to the poor, not half of what he stole.

To me the proper understanding is he reduced his lifestyle from that of comfort and luxury to the standard of living of a common man. Further he knew there were some that would be mad at him and was willing to repay them with interest.

I highly doubt he went in debt and that he never stole anything.

 

[lak611]

I get the impression that he was not righteous in the past, but he repented of his sins. Then Jesus forgave him. His penance was repaying his debts more than what the Law required.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

We read in yesterday’s gospel about Zacheus who the Lord invited to dinner with him.

I suspect that Zacaheus was not one of the tax collectors who gave tax collectors a bad game. He repents from his (unnamed sins), and he says (Luke 19:8) “Look, Lord! Here and now I give half of my possessions to the poor, and if I have cheated anybody out of anything, I will pay back four times the amount.”"

From penitents.org/frdzacheus.html we read "Incidentally this is, according to the Law of Moses, the greatest act of restitution that one can do. "

Suppose he was a tax collector who was extorting money - this means that he would have given away 1/2 of what he stole, and then 4 times that which he illegally stole. So if he stole $1000, he would give away $500+$4000, which means he would have given away $4500 for a theft of $1000.

To me there are three possibilities - he went into debt to pay it back, he had an inheritance, or he did not steal anything in the first place.

I am wondering if any of you can comment on this!

Only if fleecing one’s countrymen for the benefit of an occupying power, & taking something for oneself, is virtuous. He was a collaborator - a quisling, just like one of those who collaborated with the Nazis when they occupied France.​

Christ came to him because he was the scum of the earth - not because he was virtuous. Christ saves scum, human trash, people whom no decent person would dream of wasting time on. If He had come for the virtuous, He would not have attacked excellent & upright folk such as the Pharisees. It is human trash, not respectable & decent people, who are in a position to see that they are trash - they know they are revolting, whereas so-called respectable & decent people are in danger of being dazzled by their very virtues, so they are in danger of becoming “as pure as angels and as proud as Lucifer”.

Zacchaeus belonged to a hated & despised class, the very scum of society; so he was in no danger of being dazzled by his virtues. God can do nothing with the proud, unless He shatters their pride. If He does not, their very virtues may lead to their damnation, by blinding them to the greatness of their danger.

 

[lak611]

Only if fleecing one’s countrymen for the benefit of an occupying power, & taking something for oneself, is virtuous. He was a collaborator - a quisling, just like one of those who collaborated with the Nazis when they occupied France.​

Christ came to him because he was the scum of the earth - not because he was virtuous. Christ saves scum, human trash, people whom no decent person would dream of wasting time on. If He had come for the virtuous, He would not have attacked excellent & upright folk such as the Pharisees. It is human trash, not respectable & decent people, who are in a position to see that they are trash - they know they are revolting, whereas so-called respectable & decent people are in danger of being dazzled by their very virtues, so they are in danger of becoming “as pure as angels and as proud as Lucifer”.

Zacchaeus belonged to a hated & despised class, the very scum of society; so he was in no danger of being dazzled by his virtues. God can do nothing with the proud, unless He shatters their pride. If He does not, their very virtues may lead to their damnation, by blinding them to the greatness of their danger.

This is very true.

 

[TMC]

Only if fleecing one’s countrymen for the benefit of an occupying power, & taking something for oneself, is virtuous. He was a collaborator - a quisling, just like one of those who collaborated with the Nazis when they occupied France.​

Christ came to him because he was the scum of the earth - not because he was virtuous. Christ saves scum, human trash, people whom no decent person would dream of wasting time on. If He had come for the virtuous, He would not have attacked excellent & upright folk such as the Pharisees. It is human trash, not respectable & decent people, who are in a position to see that they are trash - they know they are revolting, whereas so-called respectable & decent people are in danger of being dazzled by their very virtues, so they are in danger of becoming “as pure as angels and as proud as Lucifer”.

Zacchaeus belonged to a hated & despised class, the very scum of society; so he was in no danger of being dazzled by his virtues. God can do nothing with the proud, unless He shatters their pride. If He does not, their very virtues may lead to their damnation, by blinding them to the greatness of their danger.

Well put, as usual, GoG.