The Gospel of Luke

by Pablo T. Gadenz

  15One of his fellow guests on hearing this said to him, “Blessed is the one who will dine in the kingdom of God.” 16He replied to him, “A man gave a great dinner to which he invited many. 17When the time for the dinner came, he dispatched his servant to say to those invited, ‘Come, everything is now ready.’ 18But one by one, they all began to excuse themselves. The first said to him, ‘I have purchased a field and must go to examine it; I ask you, consider me excused.’ 19And another said, ‘I have purchased five yoke of oxen and am on my way to evaluate them; I ask you, consider me excused.’ 20And another said, ‘I have just married a woman, and therefore I cannot come.’ 21The servant went and reported this to his master. Then the master of the house in a rage commanded his servant, ‘Go out quickly into the streets and alleys of the town and bring in here the poor and the crippled, the blind and the lame.’ 22The servant reported, ‘Sir, your orders have been carried out and still there is room.’ 23The master then ordered the servant, ‘Go out to the highways and hedgerows and make people come in that my home may be filled. 24For, I tell you, none of those men who were invited will taste my dinner.’”

  OT: Deut 22:4; Prov 25:6–7

  NT: Matt 12:11; 22:1–10; 23:6, 12; Mark 12:39; Luke 6:6–11; 11:37, 43; 13:10–17; 18:14; 20:46

  Catechism: Jesus dines with Pharisees, 575, 588; sabbath healing, 582; parables about the kingdom feast, 546

  Lectionary: Luke 14:1, 7–14: Twenty-Second Sunday Ordinary Time (Year C)

  [14:1–3]

  For the third time, Jesus goes to dine (literally, “eat bread,” as in v. 15) in the home of one of the Pharisees (see 7:36; 11:37). Similarly, for the third time, a controversy arises about healing on the sabbath (see 6:6; 13:10–11). The scholars of the law and Pharisees present at the meal are observing him carefully (same verb as in 6:7), undoubtedly ready again to accuse him. Right in front of Jesus is a man suffering from dropsy—that is, edema or swelling caused by excess fluid. Because this condition may be accompanied by thirst, but satisfying the thirst only makes it worse, ancient writers compared dropsy to greed.11 Thus it is often suggested that Luke specifies the man’s illness so that it may serve as a metaphor for these Pharisees’ insatiable craving for honor (14:7).

  The scene contrasts the leading Pharisee with this sick man, setting up an example of the reversal between first and last that was recently announced (13:30). The man’s presence triggers what follows. As before, Jesus asks if it is lawful to cure on the sabbath (6:9).

  [14:4]

  Although they kept silent, the reader by now knows that the answer is yes. It is not only lawful but most fitting: it “ought” to be done (13:16). Therefore, Jesus healed and then dismissed him, which suggests that the man was not one of those invited. The verb “dismiss” is the same verb used when the crippled woman was “set free” (13:12), also on a sabbath. Jesus is thus continuing the jubilee program he announced on a sabbath of bringing “liberty to captives” (4:18).

  [14:5–6]

  Jesus again justifies his action by appealing to the Pharisees’ own sabbath activities (13:15) and by reasoning from the lesser to the greater (see 12:6–7, 24; 13:15–16). Alluding to one of the laws in the Torah—“You shall not see your neighbor’s donkey or ox fallen on the road and ignore it; you must help in lifting it up” (Deut 22:4)—Jesus gives an example of a son or ox12 that falls into a cistern. Would not everyone immediately pull him out on the sabbath day? Of course. If this is done even for an animal, how much more ought the man be healed on the sabbath! However, they were unable to answer his question. They seem to be like those who “ate and drank” in his company (Luke 13:26) but nevertheless find themselves excluded from God’s kingdom (13:28).

  [14:7–11]

  The “no comment” response by the invited guests, who instead are focused on choosing the places of honor (see 11:43; 20:46), now prompts Jesus to teach in parables. Eating bread (14:1) is not sufficient, as they also need God’s word spoken through Jesus (see Deut 8:3). Just as in his first two visits to Pharisees’ homes, Jesus ends up teaching about what happens there (Luke 7:36–40; 11:37–39).

  In the first parable, Jesus instructs the guests to do the opposite of what they are doing, lest they be forced to give their place to a more distinguished guest and with embarrassment go to the lowest [eschatos] place (see Prov 25:6–7). Rather, by choosing the lowest place for themselves, they may be invited to a higher position and thus be held in esteem or honor by the others. At a practical level, this is good advice for those concerned precisely about honor and shame. More importantly, at the level of the gospel message, the teaching indicates the great reversal being worked by God between first and last (eschatos, Luke 13:30).

  In other words, everyone who exalts himself will be humbled—that is, by God—but the one who humbles himself will be exalted, also by God (see Ezek 17:24; 21:31).13 This message is so important that it is repeated verbatim later (Luke 18:14). Earlier, Mary also proclaimed the same message in her Magnificat: God “has looked upon his handmaid’s lowliness” (1:48) and “has lifted up the lowly” (1:52). Jesus preached this message because he lived it: “He humbled himself. . . . Because of this, God greatly exalted him” (Phil 2:8–9).

  In the parable, the meal is described as a wedding banquet, just as in Jesus’ parable about the servants awaiting their master’s return (Luke 12:36). Earlier, at Levi’s banquet (5:34), Jesus referred to himself as the bridegroom and his disciples as wedding guests. Therefore, the parable here, which superficially appears to be a lesson about social etiquette, is ultimately about how to enter and recline at table (12:37; 13:29–30) at the messianic wedding banquet in the kingdom.

  [14:12–14]

  Having instructed the guests, Jesus now teaches the host about entrance into the kingdom banquet. With that goal in mind, the host should follow these rules about guests at a lunch or a dinner: invite no one (e.g., relatives, friends, wealthy neighbors) who might return the favor, thus giving repayment (see 6:34). Rather, invite to a banquet those like the man with dropsy: the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind (see v. 21)—in other words, people who cannot repay. Doing so extends Jesus’ own mission of proclaiming good news to “the poor,” recovery of sight to “the blind,” and healing for “the lame” (4:18; 7:22). Jesus pronounces a beatitude on those doing so, who become blessed like the poor themselves (6:20). They will be repaid, by God, at the resurrection of the righteous from the dead in the age to come (see 20:35–36; Acts 24:15; Rom 6:5).

  [14:15]

  One of Jesus’ fellow guests, realizing that he is speaking about the heavenly banquet, interjects with a beatitude of his own: Blessed is the one who will dine (literally, “eat bread,” as in Luke 14:1) in the kingdom of God. Earlier, Jesus had similarly declared “blessed” those servants who were vigilant for their master’s arrival, promising that they would “recline at table” (12:37). He had also just spoken about those who “will recline at table in the kingdom of God” (13:29).

  [14:16–17]

  Jesus again uses the interruption to develop his teaching further (see 11:45; 12:13, 41; 13:1). With another parable, he clarifies his fellow guest’s beatitude as he earlier did with the one spoken by the woman in the crowd (11:27–28). The parable of the great dinner—referring again to the kingdom banquet—involves a man hosting it, a servant who is dispatched (better, “sent,” verb apostellō, as in 9:2), those originally invited who do not come, and two other groups of people who replace them (14:21–23). It is another illustration of God’s reversal of the last and the first (13:30).

  [14:18–20]

  Those invited excuse themselves, beginning with the first. They represent those in Israel who are “unwilling” to be gathered by Jesus (13:34), especially leaders like the Pharisee and his guests (see 14:1). As a result, they end up last, not even tasting the dinner (v. 24).

  The excuses of those who purchased a field and five yoke of oxen involve possessions. The third involves a family relationship—the man who jus
t married a woman. For similar reasons, the Torah granted an exemption from military service (Deut 20:5–7; 24:5), but that is not the situation here. Moreover, Jesus will presently teach that the radical demands of discipleship in the kingdom involve renouncing “possessions” (Luke 14:33) and even “hating” one’s family: “father and mother, wife and children” (14:26 [emphasis added]; see comment). The demands are worth it, however. Hence, even if the excuses seem like good ones (see 9:57–62), they pale in comparison to the blessing of dining in God’s kingdom (14:15).

  [14:21]

  The servant—who represents Jesus’ disciples sent out on mission—reports the excuses to his master (kyrios). This master of the house (13:25) then twice tells him to find others to come to the banquet. The first group is from the town itself, referring to others from within Israel: the poor and the crippled, the blind and the lame. These are exactly the same categories of people mentioned in Jesus’ instructions to the host (14:13), suggesting that Jesus, as the Lord (kyrios) and master of the house14 (as in 13:25–27), is again critiquing the attitude of his host and the other Pharisees.15 It is precisely those neglected by these Pharisees who end up being invited to the feast. Included among these would also be the tax collectors and sinners with whom Jesus ate (5:29–30; 7:34; 15:1–2; 19:5–7).

  LIVING TRADITION

  The Great Dinner in Heaven

  St. Gregory the Great offers an insightful explanation and application of the parable:

  It is now the time for the dinner, and we are being called. As we see that the end of the age has come near [see 1 Cor 10:11], we have all the less reason to excuse ourselves from God’s meal. As we reflect that there is no time remaining, we must dread to lose the time of grace at hand. God’s meal is not called a lunch but a dinner, because after lunch dinner is still to come, whereas after dinner there is no remaining meal. . . . Whom does the servant sent by the head of the household . . . signify but . . . those who preach? . . . I am coming to invite you to God’s dinner. . . . We are invited to God’s banquet, and we excuse ourselves. . . . A supreme Householder is inviting you to a dinner, an eternal banquet, but one person is given to avarice, another to inquisitiveness, another to physical pleasure. . . . Proud sinners are rejected, so that humble sinners can be chosen. . . . The poor and the feeble, the blind and the lame, are called, and come, because the weak and the despised in this world are often quicker to hear the voice of God. . . . Still there is room. . . . The multitude of Israelites who believed did not fill the space of the heavenly banquet. . . . Room still remained in the kingdom for the great number of the Gentiles. . . . You see how he himself calls, how he calls by the angels, by the patriarchs, the prophets, the apostles, by pastors, and even by me; often he calls by miracles, often by calamities; sometimes he calls by prosperity in this world, sometimes by adversity. Let no one treat this lightly: if he has excused himself when he was called, when he wants to come in he may not be able to. . . . Therefore . . . let temporal things be for the journey, and long for the eternal things of your arrival.a

  a. Gregory the Great, Homily 36, in Forty Gospel Homilies, trans. David Hurst (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1990), 314–23.

  With his inclusion of the blind and the lame occurring on his way to Jerusalem, where he is proclaimed king (19:38), Jesus is also presented as a new David. As earlier he corrected Elijah (9:54–55), he now corrects David, who said, as he went to Jerusalem and became king over Israel, “the lame and the blind shall be the personal enemies of David” (2 Sam 5:8).

  [14:22–23]

  Still there is room, so the master (kyrios), addressed as Sir (kyrios), has a second group brought in, people from outside the town—the highways and hedgerows. These therefore represent the Gentiles, those outside Israel, who come from all four directions (see Luke 13:29) and will be brought in through the Church’s mission (e.g., Acts 11:18).

  [14:24]

  The concluding statement blurs the parable with reality since the pronoun you is now in the plural, so it is not just the master speaking to his servant, but Jesus warning the guests invited (Luke 14:7) to the Pharisee’s home that none of them will enter the kingdom banquet (13:26–28) and taste the dinner if they refuse the invitation by rejecting Jesus.

  In summary, Jesus’ third meal in a Pharisee’s home becomes the setting for his extended teaching on the messianic wedding banquet in the kingdom of God. This banquet is not governed by social rules of honor but by the principle of reversal. Jesus has extended his invitation—the verb “invite” or “call” in some form occurs twelve times in verses 7–24—and “everything is now ready” (v. 17). He awaits the response.

  Reflection and Application (14:12–14)

  Invitation list. “Invite the poor” (14:13). When Mother Teresa was growing up in Albania, her parents by word and example taught her and her siblings this message of welcoming the poor of the community to the family table.16 Her life gives testimony that she learned the lesson well. How about us? Whom do we invite to dinner?

  The Cost of Discipleship (14:25–35)

  25Great crowds were traveling with him, and he turned and addressed them, 26“If any one comes to me without hating his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple. 27Whoever does not carry his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple. 28Which of you wishing to construct a tower does not first sit down and calculate the cost to see if there is enough for its completion? 29Otherwise, after laying the foundation and finding himself unable to finish the work the onlookers should laugh at him 30and say, ‘This one began to build but did not have the resources to finish.’ 31Or what king marching into battle would not first sit down and decide whether with ten thousand troops he can successfully oppose another king advancing upon him with twenty thousand troops? 32But if not, while he is still far away, he will send a delegation to ask for peace terms. 33In the same way, everyone of you who does not renounce all his possessions cannot be my disciple.

  34“Salt is good, but if salt itself loses its taste, with what can its flavor be restored? 35It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out. Whoever has ears to hear ought to hear.”

  OT: Deut 33:9

  NT: Luke 8:8; 9:23; 18:29; John 12:25. // Matt 5:13; 10:37–38; Mark 9:50

  Catechism: following Jesus above all else, 1618, 2232, 2544

  Lectionary: Luke 14:25–33: Twenty-Third Sunday Ordinary Time (Year C)

  [14:25–26]

  Speaking now to the great crowds (see 11:29; 12:1) that are traveling with him, Jesus explains the radical commitment required of those who follow him. Three times he sets forth a condition without which a person, he says, cannot be my disciple (14:26, 27, 33). First, Jesus demands a commitment greater than one’s attachment to family members: parents, wife, children, and siblings (see 14:20; 18:29–30). Jesus has already led by example in this regard (8:19–21). However, just as there was no incompatibility between Jesus’ natural family and the family of his disciples in the early Church (Acts 1:13–14), so too following Jesus does not necessarily lead to a break with one’s family. His reference to hating one’s relatives is a Jewish idiom that uses hyperbole to indicate one’s preference (Mal 1:2–3; Rom 9:13). For example, the phrase “Leah was hated” (Gen 29:31 RSV) means that Jacob “loved Rachel more than Leah” (Gen 29:30 RSV). Disciples should thus love Jesus more than they love their family, and indeed more than their own life. They must of course still love their families—“Honor your father and your mother” (Luke 18:20, citing the Decalogue)—as well as themselves (10:27, citing Lev 19:18).

  [14:27]

  Second, a disciple must carry his own cross and come after Jesus. Earlier, Jesus had similarly spoken of taking up one’s cross and following him (Luke 9:23). Self-sacrifice even to the point of losing one’s life for his sake is how one saves it (9:24).

  [14:28–32]

  Before mentioning the third condition (14:33), Jesus supports his teac
hing with two short parables. Most interpreters apply them to his disciples. Because of the commitment involved in following Jesus, potential disciples, according to both parables, should first sit down to deliberate. Following Jesus is not a decision to be made lightly.

  In the first parable, about building a tower, the issue is the cost involved. One must have enough financial resources to bring the project to completion, or else face mockery from onlookers. The message of this parable seems to support most closely the third condition of discipleship mentioned in this passage (v. 33), which similarly involves financial resources: deliberation is required before giving up one’s possessions to follow Jesus.

  In the second parable, about a king marching into battle against another king, the issue is the number of troops needed to win. The stakes are higher than in the first parable since one’s life is on the line in the decision whether to fight or to seek terms of peace (19:42, same Greek phrase as here). The message of this parable especially recalls the first condition of discipleship (14:26), in which Jesus calls his disciples to love him even more than their own lives.