The Sánchez Archives TWENTY-FIFTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME Year C

By
Patricia Datchuck Sánchez

Stewardship

Amos 8:4-7
1 Timothy 2:1-8
Luke 16:1-13

When justice and charity are relinquished to profits and progress then the business of making money has become a god and true religion is lost (Amos). But when the prudence and ingenuity of the entrepreneur are incorporated by the disciple, then religion benefits (Luke). Christians are not called to an isolated existence untouched by secular affairs but to an involvement with the world; by their very presence the lives of others are improved (1 Timothy).

Amos 8:4-7.

Each of the three selections for today’s liturgy pertains to the subject of stewardship. In the text from Amos, the shepherd of Judah called to be God’s prophet and steward of his word confronted his fellow countrymen from the north. Amos railed against Israel for having violated the sacred trust of the covenant and its laws. In the second reading, Timothy, the faithful steward of God’s people in Ephesus, was reminded that one aspect of responsible discipleship was that of prayer for all in authority, even and especially those who were the stewards of civil and secular power. The gospel text with its curious parable about the conniving manager offered a skillful lesson in stewardship for all Jesus’ disciples.

Amos was the first of the so-called writing prophets (although his was probably a secretarial endeavor) who functioned actively as a prophet sometime during the 40 year span when Uzziah was king of Judah (781-743 B.C.E. ). A rugged man from Tekoa (modern day Tequ’a is about six miles south of Bethlehem) in Judah, Amos made his living by shepherding (Amos 1:1) a breed of sheep especially valued for their fine wool. A migrant worker, Amos traveled from the hill country of Judah (ca. 3000 feet above sea level) where he tended sheep, to the lower slopes of the Judean hills where he was seasonably employed as a “dresser of sycamore trees” (Amos 7:14). Actually, the trees were a form of wild fig that required a skillful hand to pinch or nip the fruit. This process would release an insect that impeded the ripening of the fig and would have eventually rotted the fruit. While he was at work (Amos 7:15), Amos received his prophetic call to go from his native Judah to the northern kingdom of Israel. There, a most unlikely candidate, he was to confront the more sophisticated northerners with their faults and to convince them that, unless they repented, they would meet a disastrous end.

Socially and religiously the situation in the northern kingdom was in a state of rapid deterioration. Ignoring the equity and charity that were to characterize their covenantal fellowship, the rich lived in fine stone homes, elaborately decorated with wood and ivory inlay. While the wealthy feasted on fine foods and rich wines, the poor eked a wretched and miserable existence from a land depleted by war (2 Kings 12:24-25), drought and blight (Amos 4:7-9).

In the verses immediately preceding today’s first reading (8: 1-3), Amos shared with his audience one of his several oracular visions. The prophet described his inspiration as a basket of fully ripe summer fruit just waiting to be eaten. The fruit, so ripe as to be only moments away from spoiling, was compared by Amos to Israel, so ripe in its sins as to be only moments away from God’s devouring justice. In today’s reading, the prophet has attacked in particular those who despoiled the people of Israel by their fraudulent business practices. Evidently, these merchants and tradespeople were so caught up in the business of making money that they were impatient when the feasts of the new moon and Sabbath occurred. During the holy days, sacrifices were offered and all were to observe the prescribed rest in honor of the Lord (Numbers 28:11-15).

Not only did these predatory merchants regard the Sabbath rest as a loss in profits, but their business methods were completely unscrupulous. The “diminishing of the ephah” and “the adding to the shekel” were dishonest weighing procedures similar to the butcher who keeps his thumb on the scales! Significantly, these injustices were bring perpetrated on the poor as they tried to buy wheat for bread, the very staff of life.

1 Timothy 2:1-8

In one of the many memorable scenes of the play, Fiddler on the Roof, the village rabbi had just taught his congregation that there is a blessing for everything. “Is there,” the people inquired, “a blessing even for the Tsar?!” In reply, the rabbi intoned, “May God bless and keep the Tsar... far away from us!” Although this is probably not the style of prayer the author of 1 Timothy had in mind, nevertheless he did counsel his charges to pray for all, “especially for kings and those in authority.” This and other counsels concerning the pastoral care and ordering of the Christian community have caused the two letters to Timothy and the one to Titus to be referred to as the pastoral letters or simply the pastorals. All three letters were instructive in nature, advising the communities in Ephesus (I and 2 Timothy) and Crete (Titus) to: (1) remain faithful to the traditional deposit of the faith, (2) defend the faith against heretical elements, (3) appoint and obey qualified leaders among the local communities, (4) regulate and safeguard the integrity of public worship, (5) support the faithful in their efforts to live grace-filled lives in accordance with their particular vocations in life.

Timothy had been converted by Paul on the apostle’s first mission to Ephesus (ca. 47 C.E. ). When Paul passed through a second time, Timothy joined him and worked as his companion. Later, Paul left Timothy in Ephesus to shepherd the community of believers there. At the time when 1 Timothy was written, the situation of the Christian community was a perilous one. Because they were regarded by Rome as lacking in civic virtues (they refused to worship the emperor, etc.), Christians were subject to recurrent persecutions. Probably, the advice to pray for all peoples, especially the authorities, was aimed at easing the tension between the believers and the empire. This seems clear in the author’s statement: “that we may be able to lead undisturbed and tranquil lives” (v. 2). Moreover, the author underscored the universal scope of God’s plan of salvation: “for he wants all to be saved and come to know the truth” (v. 4). Rome was not merely to be tolerated as a hostile environment; even Rome was to enjoy the benefits of Jesus’ mediation and ransom (v. 5). Down to the present age, Christians continue to thrive within an alien and at times aggressive society. The exhortation to prayer and the reminder that salvation is for all remain valuable lessons.

Luke 16:1-13.

Often described as a controversial and difficult parable, Luke’s story of the rich man and his clever manager is more easily understood against the background of ancient Palestinian economics and usury laws. According to the parable proper (vv. 1-8a) the manager had been caught in the act of swindling his master (probably by embezzlement) and was given notice of his termination. Given the known history of the times, the rich man may have been an absentee land owner who had entrusted his business affairs to a manager. The manager (agent, steward, in other translations) was a trained and trusted employee, who had the authority to represent his master in all business transactions. In that capacity, the manager could make loans, rent or lease property, collect debts and fees, etc.

On each business transaction, the manager, like the tax collector, was to recoup his master’s money in full. In the process he was free to earn for himself on each transaction a commission that took the form of interest added on to the principal. According to the law (Exodus 22:25, Leviticus 25:36, Deuteronomy 23:19ff), it was forbidden to take interest on loans to fellow Israelites. But, as W.J. Harrington points out, ways had been found of evading the law. It was argued that the law applied only to the destitute in order to protect them from exploitation. If it could be proven that the intended borrower had at least some of the commodity he wished to borrow and was under no compulsion, a loan could be permitted. “In this way commercial transactions were concluded by a legal fiction, without infringing on the letter of the law” (W.J. Harrington). Wheat and oil, the commodities mentioned in the parable, were especially liable to this kind of legal maneuvering because most people had at least the minimum of both materials. Therefore the manager’s action of exacting interest on the wheat and oil (his own commission ) and then of reducing that interest on his own volition was an accepted legal procedure.

Seeing that his employment was soon to be terminated due to his past dishonesty, the manager realized he could “not dig ditches” (v. 3). According to the literal translation of v. 3, the manager was “physically incapable” of such manual work. In addition to this physical limitation, he had the psychological burden of being ashamed to beg. Therefore, aware of his capacities and incapacities, the manager set about making provisions for his future so that, when he was fired, he would have friends to support him and to welcome him into their homes. To that end, he called his master’s debtors and reduced their debts by 50 and 20 per cent respectively. In actual fact, he had done his master no injustice; he had not acted dishonestly. He had merely surrendered his own commission, viz., the interest he as manager had added to the principal owed his master. For this prudent act his master praised the manager for “being enterprising” (v. 8a).

With this understanding of the Palestinian economic situation, the parable need no longer perplex the interpreter. Consequently the point of the parable, expressed in v. 8b seems clear. Faced with a crisis, the manager (one of the worldly) acted swiftly and employed even radical means in order to deal with his situation. In its original context the parable described for its hearers their own situation, i.e., Jesus’ preaching of the kingdom was the crisis to be dealt with. In response to that crisis, radical choices had to be made and swift action had to be taken lest the summons to salvation be forfeited (by the other worldly).

Attached to the parable (vv. 1-8a) and its primary meaning (v. 8b) is a string of sayings that represent other, later interpretations, added by the evangelist and the first century church. All the sayings are linked by a complex network of catchwords, the connection of which is lost in translation. In the first interpretation (v. 8), Jesus’ disciples were exhorted to make good use of this world’s goods so as to reap an eternal reward (“a lasting reception”). If the cunning manager could provide so well for his future by using material things, Jesus’ followers should be capable of equal prudence and wisdom. Given the general Lucan attitude toward material possessions, it would seem that the evangelist was referring to the giving of alms, sharing in common, etc. By prudent use of material goods, the hardships of the poor could be lessened and the cause of the kingdom would be furthered.

In its second interpretative comment (vv. 10-12), the scene shifts from the eschatological aspect of the kingdom to the daily preparation for it. By proving themselves worthy in: (1) little things, (2) elusive wealth, and (3) someone else’s money, the would-be stewards of God’s people can become worthy of (1 ) greater trust, (2) lasting wealth, (3) his/her own reward. The third and final interpretation (v. 13) has no real connection to the parable but describes that quality of total dedication Jesus expected from his disciples. One could not serve both God and money. Money or “mammon” (from the root ’amen: to be firm) meant “that in which one puts one’s trust.” Jesus’ disciples were to faithfully serve and trust in God alone while making wise use of money for the sake of others. As C. Talbert has expressed it, wealth or mammon is to be used sacramentally, as a means of expressing love of God by helping others. This ideal of the wise management of wealth was reflected in the life-style of the early community (Acts 2:44-45, 4:32, 34, 6: 1 ff). Today’s Christians are called to the same ideal of responsible and caring stewardship.

1. Dishonest dealings in the business place makes weekend worship a lie (Amos).

2. If politicians received as much prayerful support as financial backing, who knows what the impact might be (1 Timothy) ?

3. Naiveté with regard to worldly affairs is a detriment to true discipleship (Luke).

[NOTE TO USERS: This archive is available for use without charge, but it remains the property of the author and under copyright with Celebrations Publications. Users are permitted to print individual Sunday commentaries for pastoral use, but are prohibited from downloading or copying files or printing any portion of this for sale or distribution.]