Prodigal Son: Luke 15:11-32
Jesus’ parables have widespread appeal because they speak to people of all walks of life. In the Parable of the Prodigal Son, listeners can easily identify with the older son or younger son, or even the father. Sometimes a person will identify with multiple characters over the course of his or her life, depending on how their circumstances change. This particular parable, however, becomes more problematic when we consider the gender and socio-economic class of the three main characters. They are all upper-class men.
Female readers and the poor can still glean much from this story and might see themselves in one of these three characters. But they might also approach the parable differently than someone who is male or middle-class. For instance, a mother might read this story as an illustration of what happens when women are excluded from major family decisions. The question of the prodigal son’s inheritance and his departure from the family estate are settled by the younger son and his father. The idea of getting what’s coming to you and of going out into the world and establishing your own life – these are masculine values. Sibling rivalry tends to be very strong among brothers, and holding a grudge against your brother not for leaving the home but for squandering part of the family’s wealth is once again more typical of males. Women can easily overvalue these same things, but they tend to prioritize other things instead. Imagine a mother watching by the door as her youngest son leaves home, sobbing uncontrollably as the boy she raised from birth no longer wants to be a part of the family. Imagine her pleading with her husband, begging him to see that money and independence aren’t nearly as important as family and relationships. She loses this argument, but she is vindicated by the story’s end when her child returns home and acknowledges that family and relationships are what matter most. Viewed in this light, the parable actually teaches that traditional male values often prevent us from seeing the bigger picture. Mothers see that picture much more clearly.
Female readers might also be upset by the older son’s comment about prostitutes. In the conversation between the father and his oldest son, the latter accuses his younger brother of swallowing up his father’s wealth with prostitutes (verse 30). Many readers assume he’s painting an accurate portrait of his brother’s behavior, but how would the older brother know? He wasn’t there, and he hasn’t even spoken to his brother yet. More importantly, look back at verse 13 where the narrator tells us exactly what the prodigal son did. He “squandered his inheritance on a life of dissipation.” That’s pretty vague. He might have gambled, wasted the money on wine, or done all sorts of things. The word for “dissipation” (ασωτως) is sometimes translated as “debauchery” or “dissolute living,” but it doesn’t necessarily carry a sexual connotation. The older son is merely speculating about his brother’s activities. His comment, therefore, is less revealing of the prodigal son’s misbehavior than it is of his own pettiness. He’s jealous at the reception his brother receives and maligns his reputation further by suggesting he has been sexually promiscuous. Male readers are capable of recognizing the older son’s exaggeration, but female readers are probably more inclined to catch the error, wondering why the only explicit reference to females in this story puts them in a degrading role.
The poor and working class might also feel like they’re on the outside as they read this parable, but their perspective can likewise help others view the story differently. When the prodigal son runs out of money and is forced to work on another man’s estate, he joins the poor in the fields. A rich man thus becomes a pauper. Less affluent readers might see this young man as someone who has entered their world and can now empathize with their plight. He knows what it’s like to want for food, to be far away from home working on someone else’s land as a migrant worker, and to yearn for a better life. Unlike them, however, the prodigal son is able to return home to a life of security, but he shows his continued solidarity with the working class by wanting to become a hired hand on his father’s farm. This might give readers hope that rich people who come into contact with the poor will not forget them. Of course the prodigal son is treated lavishly when he arrives home, possibly symbolizing the love God has for all those in poverty and foreshadowing the warm reception all poor people will receive in heaven (see also Luke 16:19-31). But this part of the parable could be read in yet another way. Remember that the story is open-ended with no definitive conclusion. Perhaps the generosity of the father will inspire his sons (or at least the younger son) to act similarly toward others. Now that the younger son has experienced poverty, he will exude the same generosity toward the people he toiled with, putting fine robes on them and hosting them with a great feast. If giving up one-third of his estate did not bother the father (nor did spending additional money when his son returned to him), then other affluent people will view their wealth similarly. People are more important than money, and Jesus offers this parable to encourage the more affluent among us to show love to the ones deemed “lost” by society.
Learn more about practicing this method on your own.