HE WAS LOST AND HAS BEEN FOUND

HOMILY FOR THE FOURTH SUNDAY OF LENT, YEAR C

Rev. Fr. Ezekoka Peter Onyekachi

The Gospel is the famous parable of the prodigal son (Luke 15:1-3. 11-32). A more intense study of the parable leads us to a discovery of the main character of the parable of the prodigal son; and that is the father. Pay closer attention to the way Jesus introduces the story: A man had two sons… The man is the subject of the sentence and therefore the person of interest and the point of departure of the rest of the story. Other characters would be put into place to serve and bring to the limelight the amazing character of the man. More so, another interesting point is to look at why Jesus told this parable. The Pharisees and the scribes were complaining how a man who claimed to be a prophet and presumably holy man would be dining and eating with sinners and tax collectors. So, their complaints led Jesus to tell them three stories/parables that teach God’s acceptance of and mercy on the sinner, one of which is the parable of the prodigal son. It is the story of a man who not only welcomed a very sinful son but also prepared a feast of welcome to mark his return. This man’s reason was that the boy was lost and was found. Sin makes us lost while repentance and forgiveness makes us found. 

So, by that story, Jesus meant to ask them: if you say this of me because I dine with tax collectors, what can you then say of such a man who forgave the sin of a son who squandered his wealth, and lived a reckless life, and yet was he able to feast for him on his return, even after having hurt him so deeply by his former decisions? Does this not entail that Jesus tried to teach the Pharisees and scribes that God accepts us even when we have done the most stupid of all things? God loves us even when we hurt him. God dines with us even when we have helped in squandering his wealth. God prepares a banquet for us even when our decisions go contrary to his will for us. Therefore, the central focus of the parable is on the actions, reactions and the response of the father rather than the waywardness of the sons. These two brothers remind us also of the two-brother story of Esau and Jacob of Genesis 25 in which the younger brother triumphed by crook over the older brother. Jesus has thus reversed that old expectation by making the prodigal son a parody of the successful younger brother whose elder brother was not vanquished but was even invited to the great feast that celebrated the return of the lost younger brother.

Let us now analyze those reactions and responses of the father to the actions and requests of the sons. These remarkable reactions and responses are five in number. 

1. The first reaction of this father was a response to the request of his younger son to give to him his own share of his property; that is, one-third (cf. Deut. 21:17). According to the story, without any interrogation or negotiation, the father simply divided his property. Asking the father who was still alive for his own share was the highest form of dishonor and rejection. Not minding the implication, the father still gave it him even when that request should have impeded his own joy and livelihood. And off his younger son went. He lived in luxury, squandered the wealth he never suffered for, and when he started to suffer (to the extent of serving the animal –pig– the Jews regarded as unclean), he began to realize how wayward he was and decided to go back to the father. The question for us is: must we allow ourselves to be stretched before we begin to realize the need to return to God, to repent and to be converted? 

2. The second reaction of the father was at the moment of the return of his younger son. He saw him from afar and was filled with compassion. He ran and put his arms around him and kissed him. The action of running was a ridiculous one, and indeed an undignified behavior for an elderly man of the oriental world. Yet, this father brought low his dignity and disregarded his own honor to welcome his lost son. The act of running in which he stripped himself of the dignity of elders was meant to clothe his wayward son in dignity. He denied the dignity of elders so as to dignify this unworthy son of his. This prodigal son even knew that he already lost his dignity and regarded himself as unworthy before his father.   This is the extent our heavenly father goes to restore our dignity. I see myself as a son of a kind and merciful God who is ever ready to welcome me in my depraved state. Am sure you may feel the same way.

3. The third response of this father to this prodigal son was amazing. The son condemned himself and pleaded for mercy and restoration even to a lower rank –of course, he knew he had lost his place as a son. And this father without any negotiation or condition (as he did in the first instance) simply commanded that his prodigal son should be robed in majesty. Not only was he clothed majestically, he was meant to put the signet ring and sandals. This is to signify that he must now live as a free man. Meat which was rarely eaten was in abundance to mark this as a very special occasion. This is not just the restoration of a sinner who had gone astray, but also the restoration of the dignity of the sinner that was lost. Thus, when the father said that the son was lost and had been found, it surely included his dignity and position as a bona-fide son. This prodigal son that lost his dignity and position out of his inordinate desires had regained them out of the mercy of his father. He became a free man. No more disgrace, just as there was no more disgrace for the Israelites of the first Reading whom God finally settled in the promise land (cf. Joshua 5:9-12). Their safe arrival signified that the disgrace associated with their slavery in Egypt had been undone. This is why the reading began with the captivating phrase: I have rolled away the disgrace of Egypt from you.  God restores our freedom. And we all too, like this prodigal son or the Israelites having lost our dignity and position out of our waywardness and ephemeral desires can only regain them out of the compassion of God; only if we can make that initial move to return home. 

4. This reaction/response of the father met a slight opposition. The older brother had refused to come into the house for the feast; and so followed the fourth reaction of the father. He came out and began to plead with him to come in. This is another instance of a disregard of his dignity as an elder. The older son did not accept his ‘dead’ brother as alive and as his brother. He must have thought to himself: would this now mean a further sharing of the remaining property in the future that was meant to be my legitimate share? Wouldn’t it be stupid enough on my part to allow this wayward boy partake of my share after having squandered his? He could not understand his father’s reaction to all these. He had to express his misgiving about such abrupt ceremony which he had never even received as a good son: …you have not given me even a young goat to celebrate with my friends. But this son of yours came back… (cf. vv. 29-30). Notice the tone of jealousy and anger in that question. He did not accept the boy as his own brother, but as this son of yours. And this is the point where this older son went rogue. This is the point we too can go rogue in our Christian life: when we begin an unhealthy comparison in the face of God's mercy and grace on others. Sometimes, we are inclined to compete in an unhealthy manner to prove who God really loves the most. The truth is: God has no favourites. His mercy is for all.

5. However, the father who does not abandon his sons went further to give him more explanations. This is the fifth response/reaction of the father. In his explanation was a reassurance of the security of the property that was rightfully his (all that is mine is yours…cf. v. 31b), and a reiteration of the need to be happy for a brother that was lost and found. In the tone of the older son was also the feeling of righteousness. For him, he deserved to be celebrated where as his brother does not, because he had been obedient all those while. As true as this may seem, it is a self-righteous tone, and that was the tone of those Pharisees and scribes that were complaining of Jesus’ merry with sinners. Hence, the challenge of this parable is precipitated by its open ending –we are not told whether the older son obeyed the words of his father or not. 

And here is the challenge: will righteous people enter the banqueting hall to make merry with and for the sinners, and with the God who delights in the company of those sinners? Can we live in openness with and acceptance of that sinner whom God desires to celebrate, or shall we continue to grumble why he/she must be celebrated? Must we not be happy that we all are a chosen race made heirs to the throne? Our unity and love is our strength. We must therefore reconcile and rejoice with one another. As the prodigal son reconciled with his father, and as the father appealed to the older son to reconcile and be happy with the younger brother, so also we must reconcile with God and with one another (cf. The Second Reading: 2 Cor. 5:17-21) and never forgetting to rejoice as the ambassadors of Christ that we are. May the grace of God continue to abide with us as we begin a new week and month. Amen. God bless you.