Luke 14:1, 7-14 contain parables that challenge social convention of honor and shame, with Jesus recommending proper humility and care for the weak.
The setting of the scent by Luke begins ominously. 1On one occasion when Jesus was going to the house of a leader of the Pharisees to eat a meal on the sabbath, they were watching him closely. Jesus has been invited to eat with Pharisees before in Luke's gospel (7:36ff; 11:37-54), with the last occasion ending with his malevolent enemies "lying in wait for him." The actions of Jesus provoke those concerned with such regulations. Their response involved him in arguments about proper Sabbath observance.
Verses 7-11 contain sayings concerning places of honor at a banquet. Followers show themselves to be part of the rule of God by the modesty with which at dinner they take a place at the lower end of the table. It may seem odd that the early Jewish-Christian community remembered such a mundane and secular saying, but this community valued what Jesus said, showing here that Jesus reflected upon the sanctification of everyday life.[1]
Verse 7 (unique to Luke) provides the setting Luke of a meal that reflects Greek and Roman symposium literary tradition. The meal accompanies the discussion of topics suitable for a philosophical treatise.
Verses 8-10 is an exhortation/parable, a brief proverb enlarged with an illustration,[2] that becomes an expanded warning against ambition at table. It is typical of wisdom literature a secular rule of prudence.[3] The concern it has for humility and concern for the poor are favorite themes of Luke. It draws upon elements of Israelite wisdom literature. It will have the same pattern of contrasts of proverbial counsel as we will find in verses 12-14.
8 “When you (followed by a negative action) are invited by someone to a wedding banquet, making it clear that we have a parable about a party. The advice Jesus offers about what to do when invited to a meal occurs within the context of a meal to which a Pharisee has invited Jesus. This is not just any meal: This is a dinner party, a great banquet, and the Messianic Feast (v 15). Do not sit down at the place of honor (literally "the first couches" on which the guest reclines arranged to indicate the importance of each guest), in case (potential problem) someone more distinguished than you has been invited by your host; 9 and the host who invited both of you may come and say to you, ‘Give this person your place,’ and then in disgrace you would start to take the lowest place. Such a social embarrassment is more serious in Oriental customs than a Western attempt at egalitarian seating charts. Jesus is giving advice for table-manners. The most important guests, who are distinguished by reason of age or social standing, usually arrive last. The humiliated guest is obliged to take the lowest place, since all the intermediate places have already been occupied.[4] The advice of Prov 25:6-7, which has to do with being humble rather than being humiliated, urged that one not glorify oneself in the presence of the king or stand in the place of great people, for it is better to have one authority have you come higher than to be put lower in the presence of the prince. A table-rule of Simeon ben Azzai (AD 110), was “Stand Two or three places below your proper place and wait, until they say to you, ‘Come up here,” concluding with a saying Hillel, closely related to 14:11, “My humiliation is my exaltation, and my exaltation is my humiliation.” Commenting on a dinner party at which he was the guest of honor, the Roman historian Pliny reports how his host served different grades of food to the different guests. Up at the head table, as it were, they were dining sumptuously on gourmet dishes. Further out in the room — and further down the pecking order — the grub was not so good. As for the wine, Pliny’s host had carefully prepared three small flagons to serve the stuff. “One,” Pliny points out, “was for himself and me; the next for his friends of lower order (for you must know that he measures out his friendship according to the degrees of quality); and the third for his own freed-men and mine.”[5] In any case, Jesus cautions that an attempt at securing the place of honor can actually lead to the opposite ending, complete with the shame of the host asking you to move to a lower place. This desire to choose a place of honor, the assumption that one is entitled to this distinct honor, is something that Luke identifies with the Pharisees (11:43; 20:46). Jesus speaks about and to his fellow guests at this meal. He wades into a sticky social and political morass, the etiquette of seating guests. Jesus offers a suggestion as to modes of conduct with others. He counteracts selfish ambition. Influenced by the Greek tradition of the symposium these Sabbath meals had become a time for extended dialogues, soliloquies, and speeches. The observations and suggestions Jesus makes are more proverbial than they are parabolic. The advice is good on a worldly level but takes on a theological character of how one is to act in reference to God. As the guests arrive at the dinner party, they fail to observe the counsel against arrogance and boldness that can be found throughout the Old Testament (Jer 13:15; Isa 13:11, Sirach 3:17-18). 10 But when you (followed by positive action and promise) are invited, go and sit down at the lowest place, so that when your host comes, he may say to you, ‘Friend, move up higher’; then you will be honored in the presence of all who sit at the table with you. Jesus' "parable" is a simple one. Jesus is not simply giving an etiquette lesson here by telling his listeners how to behave at a wedding banquet. He certainly is not offering a devious way to lead to elevation to the highest place by seeking out the low seat. Up to this point (v. 10), the parable functions in a way similar to the wise advice offered in Proverbs. In this meal, Jesus attacks our ethics of self-seeking and self-aggrandizement.
Verse 11 (18:14b, Matt 23:12) has the form of a secular Jewish double-stranded proverbial saying concerning promotion and demotion. It expresses the piety of the community Jesus is forming and demands a new disposition of mind.[6] In the oral tradition, the saying, while remembered, had no context. 11 For all who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.” To make the eschatological impulse clear: God will exalt the one who makes oneself the servant of others, but God will abase the one one who exalts oneself above others.[7] This proverb was already in use, for Hillel could be quoted in a similar setting by R. Simeon ben Azzai, “My humiliation is my exaltation, and my exaltation is my humiliation.” It is a piece of practical wisdom, in which pride will have a fall and humility will be rewarded. It is a call to renounce self-righteous pretensions and to self-abasement before God. [8]The idea that God humbles the proud and exalts the humble is a common theme of Hebrew wisdom:
A person’s pride will bring humiliation,
but one who is lowly in spirit will obtain honor. (Prov 29:23)
Exalt that which is low and bring low that which is exalted. (Eze 21:26)
In addition, Jesus frequently advocates reversal of roles. Such role reversal is a glimpse of the great reversal of accepted values that the coming rule of God will bring (1:50-53). While these values may not be human values, they will be the values at God's table. God is the one who "exalts" and "humbles." People fail to observe the counsel against arrogance and boldness that one can find throughout the Old Testament. The theme recurs in the epistles of the New Testament: James 4:6 and I Peter 5:5, God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble; James 4:10, Humble yourselves before the Lord, and the Lord will exalt you.
Humility is an essential virtue of the follower of Jesus. Some epistemological humility needs to characterize followers of Jesus. Humility is a sign of self-confidence. Humility suggests that we are secure enough in who we are that we can alter our views as we gain added information and face new circumstances. If all we want to do is confirm what we already believe, if we engage in debates with only a view to winning, then we have missed an important part of humility, that of achieving a greater understanding of truth. Humility will value collective wisdom. We are better off if we have within our orbit people who see the world different than we do. Humility is a virtue that once we notice it in ourselves, we have less of it. If we become aware of the depth of our humility, pride is already beginning. The reason for this is that any virtue has the design of lessening our interest in self and increasing our interest in others. Humility does not mean a low opinion of our talents or our character. Humility will lead to a proper evaluation of our gifts and passions and place them in the service of the rule of God. Humility will lead to proper love of self as a creation of God and gratitude for the time God has given us. Humility will also lead to proper love of and gratitude for others.[9]
Verses 12-14 (unique to Luke) contains an exhortation/parable, a brief proverb enlarged with an illustration,[10] as an expanded warning concerning choice of guests.[11] For Jesus, love is the law of life in the rule of God, extending to the poor with whom Jesus identified himself.[12]
Verses 12a, Jesus turns away from the guests of the previous text and focuses instead on the mandates that should guide the behavior of the host. Jesus has offered some worldly wisdom to the guests. Now, Jesus offers radical advice to the host.
Verses 12b-13, When you (followed by a negative action) give a luncheon or a dinner, do not invite your friends or your brothers or your relatives or rich neighbors, in case (potential problem) they may invite you in return, and you would be repaid. 13 But when you (followed by positive action and promise) give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind. Jesus challenges a conventional practice of antiquity and its assumption of reciprocity, which Jesus excludes for his followers. Jesus is breaking down the exclusiveness of fellowship and love that is typical of human groups.[13] Here is a direct challenge to the Essene community, which had a Teacher of Righteousness who also emphasized joy at salvation and a renewal movement within Judaism that was a call to repentance but culminated in the separation of the of the community from the larger Israel that was hopelessly corrupt. In contrast, Jesus invited all to the table of the community fellowship.[14] Jesus offers a reproof to standard human hosting behavior and offers further proof of God's graciousness to those who incarnate the rule of God by implementing the shocking advice Jesus gives. One achieved and maintained social status by knowing the right people, having people see you with the right crowd and associating only with the right kind. First, he will surely alienate those whom he does not invite - not only rich, status-laden associates, but his own family as well. Second, exchanging his "A-list" of guests with a less than "Z-List" will affect the future of his own social position. Jesus calls us to invite to the table the poor, the maimed, the lame and the blind, whom we first heard of in the Magnificat (1:46-55), and in Jesus' first public sermon (4:16-30), as being people of the kingdom. Again, Jesus tells us to go beyond the sharing of food with the "sojourner, the fatherless and the widows" (Deut 14:29), but includes the maimed, the lame and the blind, those who in the priestly code of Leviticus were forbidden to offer sacrifice to God (Lev 21:17-23). There is risk to behavior that anticipates the coming rule of God: Losing honor in the sight of the rich neighbors and family; offending friends; the risk of losing one's elite status, and even losing personal wealth. However, there is also reward (6:20-21, 24-25). The third portion of this discourse is more than proverbial wisdom. While it deals with social status, it concludes with similar reversals in the rule of God. Being a host is a time for friendliness, kindness, hospitality, and concern for others. It is a human tendency to want to do good things for one's friends. However, it is also a human tendency to go carefully over one's guest list, and this is what Jesus points out. Those invited are family, influential friends, the elite; those who can return the invitation or a lavish dinner, even improving your social station by extending an invitation to you. The elite commonly understood invitations as having some type of balanced reciprocity. A host expects some type of "return" for his graciousness. It is a luncheon or dinner with strings attached - a host does not invite someone incapable of repayment.
Table fellowship with sinners was a central feature of Jesus' ministry, according to Norman Perrin. In first-century Palestine ‘sinners' referred not to people suffering a subjective state of guilt (as in later Christianity), but to an identifiable group of social outcasts. It referred to people in one of the despised trades (which included tax collectors); those guilty of flagrant immorality (adulterers, prostitutes, extortioners, murderers, idolaters); all who failed to keep the Law according to the standards of the religious authorities; and Samaritans and Gentiles. All these, notes Marcus Borg, the interpretation of the Holiness Code in first century Judaism placed them outside acceptable behavior in Israel. To include outcasts such as these in the kingdom of God was to reject the postexilic self-interpretation of Judaism as separation from the uncleanness of the world. Jesus distinguishes between those falsely called sinners - who are in fact the victims of an oppressive system of exclusion - and true sinners, whose evil others do not ascribe to them, but who have sinned from the heart. Jesus' table fellowship with social outcasts was an acted parable of the dawning of the age of forgiveness. According to Borg, Jesus deliberately contravened the entire program of holiness of the Pharisees and other groups in Judaism. He denied the equation of holiness with separation. He rejected the notion that external things defile or pollute a person's essential being. He scandalized his hearers by his positive attitude toward Samaritans. Now it is no longer tombs that render people unclean, but that render people unclean, but the religious authorities themselves: "Woe to you! For you are like unmarked graves, and people walk over them without realizing it." Instead of holiness as separation, continues Borg, Jesus offered an economy of mercy that extends to us all, especially the outsiders, including Israel's enemies. The command to love enemies - which would have indicated Romans - points beyond the exclusiveness of the holiness code to a kindness and compassion that is all-encompassing and unlimited. Like the father watching for the prodigal's return, so God receives with joy even the most hardened sinner. God searches for those who have lost their way as a woman does for a misplaced coin. This strange God loves enemies, the ungrateful and the selfish, the good and the evil, the just and the unjust, in an all-inclusive embrace. The laws of clean and unclean had their basis in the holiness of God: 'Be holy, for I am holy'. Consequently, Jesus, by abrogating the laws of purity, was announcing a new image of God: a God not concerned with cleanliness, who loves precisely the marginalized and the rejected, whose tender womb aches for the uninvited and the unloved: a compassionate parent, transcending gender, the Mother and Father of us all. Rules of ritual purity are what keep the various people and parts of society in their proper place. Without purity regulations, there would be a crisis of distinctions in which everyone, and everything, was the same: women equal to men, outsiders equal to insiders, the sacred no different from the profane. There would be no holy place or holy priests of holy people. Gentile would be no different from Jew. 'Clean' people would sit at table with 'unclean'; no one would be better in God's sight. Socially imposed shame about the body keeps people submissive to societal authority by weakening in them the immediacy of their own sense of what is right. Without such shame, what becomes of societal authority? Domination depends on ranking. Without such distinctions, how can one know whom to dominate?[15]
14 And you will be blessed, because they cannot repay you, for you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.” Jesus does promise a reward from God here.[16] In the rule of God, God will be the host, and who can ever repay God? In humbling oneself, one adds a reward in the resurrection. The host who invites the poor will receive a blessing from God. Jesus now promises a gracious invitation to those who need it, namely those who are on the bottom of our social order. In attacking those barriers, Jesus is turning the tables upside down. Therefore, verse 14 gives an eschatological explanation for the behavior condoned in v. 12-13. The surprising policy of the rule of God bestows unexpected blessing upon this host. Because the rule of God has not yet fully realized itself in this world, however, one will not achieve this gracious act of creative accounting until the resurrection of the righteous has taken place.
The teachings that these passages offer are not merely criticisms of the elite Pharisees, but also of Luke’s communities and the church today. Jesus is not telling us to provide for the needs of the poor and the disabled - Jesus says to have them over for dinner. The host and the guest are to sit down together. He wants us to love the stranger, which is the meaning of the word "hospitality." The hospitality that Jesus demands is not that which expects something in return. We are to host those who have no means to repay.
Our customs are so different from first Judaism that it would be hard to duplicate the story Jesus tells. Yet, I came across one such story. A couple planned a lavish wedding reception. They booked a banquet room at the elegant Hyatt hotel, and made the required down payment of half the cost of the reception. It was not long, though, before the prospective groom reconsidered. He found it hard to commit, he said to his fiancée. He asked her if they could put the wedding on hold. She knew what he meant. He did not really want to think about it. He just wanted out. Therefore, after a very unpleasant scene, they parted company for good. One of the next stops for the bride was the office of the Events Manager of the Hyatt. The manager said she was sorry, but most of the deposit was non-refundable. The former bride-to-be had only two options, she explained: she could either forfeit the rest of her down payment or go ahead with the party. The more she thought about it, the more she liked the idea of going ahead with the party. You see, ten years prior, the same woman had been living in a homeless shelter. She had gotten back on her feet, found a good job, and set aside a sizable nest egg. She started developing the wild notion of using her savings to treat the down-and-out of Boston to a night on the town. Thus, it was that in June of 1990 the Hyatt in downtown Boston hosted a party such as it had never seen before. The hostess changed the menu to boneless chicken — ‘in honor of the groom,’ she said — and sent invitations to rescue missions and homeless shelters. That warm summer night, people who were used to peeling half-gnawed pizza off the cardboard dined instead on chicken cordon bleu. Hyatt waiters in tuxedos served hors d’oeuvres to senior citizens propped up by crutches and aluminum walkers. Bag ladies, vagrants and addicts took one night off from the hard life on the sidewalks outside and instead sipped champagne, ate chocolate wedding cake and danced to big-band melodies late into the night.[17]
If you got just a little inspired, or a smile, or even choked up, with that story, a part of you is yearning for the coming rule of God.
I offer a story of humility, honor, and respect from two politicians. I begin with a personal reflection. One is how time flies. I am sure that many young adults have little idea of who Bob Dole and George McGovern are. Two is how the political commitments in our lives can change. George McGovern was my first vote for President of the United States. I was attending Miltonvale Wesleyan College in Kansas at the time. I had a large picture of McGovern in my room. I liked his stance on the war. I liked his proposal to reform welfare. I was with him all the way, even when I knew that he would lose in a big way. Later, Bob Dole simply struck me as a decent man. Given some of the issues that Bill Clinton was having at the time, I thought Dole would be an upgrade from what we had. Frankly, I still do think that way. Of course, it was not to be. In both cases, I backed the loser in the presidential election. Yet, I pause for a moment to reflect on these two men.
Luke 14:7-11 warns us of grabbing honor and respect for ourselves. Jesus warns us that the way things work in the world, we will find it better to approach it with humility. "All who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted" (Luke 14:11). Humility is an elusive virtue; one cannot manufacture it. If we become conscious of our humility, we are likely no longer humble. Yet, in 14:12-14, Jesus tells us to give honor and respect to all, and not just family and friends. If disciples of Jesus host a banquet, “invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, and the blind.”
Let us return to the story of two defeated presidential candidates.
George McGovern died in 2012. He was a United States Senator whom many people will remember, if at all, as the Democrat who lost to Republican Richard Nixon in one of the most lopsided defeats in presidential history. McGovern was no coward. In truth, he was a decorated bomber pilot in World War II, a man who served his country bravely and well. His staff urged him to talk more about his war experience, but like so many veterans, he was reluctant to do so. He described himself as the son of a Methodist minister. He was a "good old South Dakota boy" who went off to war. He was a man who had been "married to the same woman forever." In short, he was humble. That humility served him well, because at the end of his life he received the World Food Prize award along with Republican Senator Bob Dole. Writing in The Washington Post, Dole said,
"Our most important commonality -- the one that would unite us during and after our service on Capitol Hill -- was our shared desire to eliminate hunger in this country and around the world. As colleagues in the 1970s on the Senate Hunger and Human Needs Committee, we worked together to reform the Food Stamp Program, expand the domestic school lunch program and establish the Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants, and Children."
Later, they worked together to strengthen global school feeding, nutrition, and education programs. They jointly proposed a program to provide poor children with meals at schools in countries throughout Africa, Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe, one that both Presidents Clinton and Bush supported. That program has now succeeded in providing meals to 22 million children in 41 different countries.
George McGovern and Bob Dole. Democrat and Republican. Both fought in World War II. Both ran for president and lost. Nevertheless, they are not, in any sense, losers. Losers do not work together, quietly and effectively, to provide meals to 22 million hungry children.
We live in a partisan political climate. Even if these two men are politicians, their lives show the kind of humility that would put them in the Humility Hall of Fame. They also demonstrate the importance of extending to all persons the honor and respect they deserve as those made in the image of God.
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5] Pliny, Letters, vol. 1, trans. William Melmoth (W. Heinemann, 1915), 110-11.
[6]
[7] Grundmann, TDNT, VIII, 16-17.
[8]
[9] Lewis, C.S. The Screwtape Letters, Chapter XIV, 63.
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13] Stahlin, TDNT, IX, 160-1.
[14]
[15] Walter Wink, Engaging the Powers, 1992, 115-116.
[16]
[17] —Philip Yancey, What’s So Amazing About Grace? (Zondervan, 1997), 48-49.
No comments:
Post a Comment