From the Sunday Note, with additional thoughts:
Jesus said to the Pharisees:
“There was a rich man who dressed in purple garments and fine linen
and dined sumptuously each day.
And lying at his door was a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores,
who would gladly have eaten his fill of the scraps
that fell from the rich man’s table.
Dogs even used to come and lick his sores.
When the poor man died,
he was carried away by angels to the bosom of Abraham.
The rich man also died and was buried,
and from the netherworld, where he was in torment,
he raised his eyes and saw Abraham far off
and Lazarus at his side.
And he cried out, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me.
Send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue,
for I am suffering torment in these flames.’
Abraham replied,
‘My child, remember that you received
what was good during your lifetime
while Lazarus likewise received what was bad;
but now he is comforted here, whereas you are tormented.
Moreover, between us and you a great chasm is established
to prevent anyone from crossing who might wish to go
from our side to yours or from your side to ours.’
He said, ‘Then I beg you, father,
send him to my father’s house, for I have five brothers,
so that he may warn them,
lest they too come to this place of torment.’
But Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the prophets.
Let them listen to them.’
He said, ‘Oh no, father Abraham,
but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’
Then Abraham said, ‘If they will not listen to Moses and the prophets,
neither will they be persuaded if someone should rise from the dead.'”
Sunday’s Gospel, Luke 16:19-31
One commentator on this reading said that in the parable “Lazarus’s moral character is ignored.” That is, whether Lazarus was good or bad or did good or bad is irrelevant: he was poor and was saved, the feasting man dressed in purple was rich and was damned. Behind the “moral character” statement hovers the question: “was this really fair?”
Let’s explore that. Notoriously, Luke’s version of the Beatitudes varies a bit from Matthew’s:
Luke: “Blessed are you who are poor, for the kingdom of God is yours.” Luke 6:20b
Matthew: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:3
Unlike Matthew, Luke also includes a list of “woes” after the Beatitudes, and the first of these is “But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation.” Luke 6:24
Lots of ink has been spilled over which version of the Beatitudes is more likely to have been “what Jesus originally said” or what modifications may have been made for Matthew’s more likely Jewish audience or for Luke’s more likely non-Jewish audience. But, over a couple of years of public ministry, speaking to Jews, non-Jews, and mixed groups, Jesus may well have used both versions at various times. The key point it this: the early Church included both versions, judging the message was essentially the same in both.
It was the same message because according to the original Scriptures (our Old Testament) the poor DID have a “moral character.” Just as the enslaved Israelites were objects of God’s special favor and activity, so the poor of all types were to be special objects of the favor and activity of the Israelites in their own country. “All types” always included poor Israelites, their widows and orphans, of course, but the Lord repeatedly extends the boundaries of the Israelites’ responsibilities to non-Israelites. A sample:
“You shall not oppress or afflict a resident alien, for you were once aliens residing in the land of Egypt. You shall not wrong any widow or orphan.” Exodus 22:20-21 “You shall love the alien as yourself.” Leviticus 19:34
Israelites who mistreat the poor are excoriated in the strongest of terms: see Micah 3:1-3 or Amos 2:6-8. Consider Malachi 3:5 “I will draw near to you for judgment, and I will be swift to bear witness against sorcerers, adulterers, and perjurers, those who deprive a laborer of wages, oppress a widow or an orphan, or turn aside a resident alien without fearing me, says the Lord of hosts.” Examples like these run through all of the Law and the Prophets.
Because the Israelites were oppressed and enslaved, they were special to God, recipients of his saving love. When they had a country of their own, the poor and oppressed who lived among them were to be special recipients of the care His people could provide. What His people had received, they were to pass on. When God came “in person” as Jesus of Nazareth, this receiving and passing on was extended in principle to all peoples of the earth through the work, witness, sacraments, and sacrifices of his body the Church. That would be me and you, learning to live out a Godly life. In the parable, the rich man dressed in purple believes he has earned what he has and has no sense of larger obligation to help his poorer brother. His moral character is bad. He reaps what he has sown.
For further reflection:
Yes, this runs through all the Law and the Prophets. It is also the teaching of the third major section of the Old Testament, the Wisdom literature. I ran across one example this morning during morning prayers: “He sins who despises the hungry; but happy is he who is kind to the poor!” Proverbs 14:21
Another: “He who has a bountiful eye will be blessed, for he shares his bread with the poor.” Proverbs 22:9
How can we not live by the pattern established by our heavenly Father?