“Saving Fish from Drowning”
Luke 16:19-31
September 30, 2007 Eighteenth Sunday after Pentecost
Preached at Kingston Road United Church by the Rev. Richard C. Choe
Charlotte, North Carolina Richard C. Choe©19 ‘There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. 20And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, covered with sores, 21who longed to satisfy his hunger with what fell from the rich man’s table; even the dogs would come and lick his sores. 22The poor man died and was carried away by the angels to be with Abraham.* The rich man also died and was buried. 23In Hades, where he was being tormented, he looked up and saw Abraham far away with Lazarus by his side.* 24He called out, “Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in agony in these flames.” 25But Abraham said, “Child, remember that during your lifetime you received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in agony. 26Besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, so that those who might want to pass from here to you cannot do so, and no one can cross from there to us.” 27He said, “Then, father, I beg you to send him to my father’s house— 28for I have five brothers—that he may warn them, so that they will not also come into this place of torment.” 29Abraham replied, “They have Moses and the prophets; they should listen to them.” 30He said, “No, father Abraham; but if someone goes to them from the dead, they will repent.” 31He said to him, “If they do not listen to Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” ’
* * *
Jesus tells a parable that was well known to his listeners. This story read from the Gospel according to Luke is a folktale which reflects a popular view of the afterlife. It focused on the individual’s fate – that there would be a just reward in the end, that there is a “great reversal” at the end. Needless to say, the story is told from the perspective of the downtrodden and the have-nots.
People in Jesus’ time believed that there was a time and place of reckoning after death. They believed that there was “heaven” for those who led an exemplary life and “hell” for those who did not. The story of an after life was often told in the ancient days as a warning that there would be a time of reckoning.
This notion of “reckoning-after-death” or a “great reversal’ may provide some “relief” and “comfort” for people who are experiencing injustice in life. “Someday my time will come” may have been a way to endure the burdens of life for many who were suffering. The notion of an after life, however, has been abused by many oppressors in history. Many abusive leaders everywhere, both secular and religious, have exploited this “reckoning-after-death” notion to tell the oppressed to accept their life situation without a fuss.
“Do not complain. Do not protest against those who oppress you. Accept what you are given and don’t seek any change. Be thankful for what you have.” Some religious thinkers describe this notion as a form of “delayed gratification” – suffer now but you will get your just reward later.
The notion of “prosperity theology” is a contradictory concept that continues to exist along with the “delayed gratification.” Many continue to believe that wealth is a sign of blessing from God and poverty a sign of God’s curse. Pharisees of Jesus’ time believed this notion based on their reading of the Book of Deuteronomy. Thus, Lazarus, for the Pharisees, would have been an example of God’s curse. Pharisees of Jesus’ time would have implicitly and explicitly accepted that Lazarus was guilty of some appalling sin, and, thus, deserved his suffering. For the Pharisees and many others, God’s blessing was individualised, personalized, and, in the end, privatized God’s action. For many, God had been reduced to a “blessing” business. Their belief in a privatized God led them to ignore the poor and vulnerable. But such a belief also created poverty and vulnerability.
It was to those who believe in a privatized God that Jesus spoke. One of the Biblical Commentary states,
“While this parable seems to be about money, it is really about values. … The question is not whether we have money, but whether we love money (over and against anything else in life) – whether we share God’s concern for the poor and the vulnerable – whether we are too preoccupied with personal concerns to notice the Lazarus in our midst.” [1]
The apathy of the rich man who walked in and out of his house every day past the starving, sore-covered man lying at his gate was the cause of the harsh judgement in the story Jesus told.
The rich man was not an evil doer. He might even be considered a kind man. He could have kicked Lazarus out of his gate yet he allowed him to be there day after day. How long would many of us allow someone who was dirty, sick, and smelling of disease to park right by our door?
The problem with the rich man, Jesus says, was that he did not even lift a finger to do anything to change Lazarus’ circumstance. Apathy, indifference and lack of concern for someone suffering on his doorstep, was the rich man’s sin. It was not a sin of commission but a sin of omission.
By naming the man Lazarus, meaning “God heals” or “God helps,” Jesus confronts the Pharisees of his time. Luke described them as “the lovers of money” (Luke 16:14). Jesus counters their prosperity theology based on Deuteronomy saying that "what is prized by human beings is an abomination in the sight of God" (Luke 16:15).
The name Lazarus is a counter statement from Jesus to those who believed in a privatized God that “God helps those whom people with apathy chose not to help.” The Pharisees would have heard Jesus’ warning to them through the parable: If they were like the rich man in life, they will be like the rich man in death. “Don’t be by-passers. Engage with the poor, the sick, and those in need” is what I hear Jesus saying.
The challenge of the parable did not end with the Pharisees. The challenge continues today.
Who do you identify with the most in the story?
What aspects of the story make you uncomfortable?
How would you like the story to end? And, why?
We, too, pass by the poor and homeless without seeing. We, too, are often so preoccupied with our own issues that we cannot see those who are in need of our help. We discover that we love money over anything else in many instances. The parable confronts us to help and heal the Lazarus people in our midst – in our city as well as in the global village.
Dr. Fumitaka Matsuoka, former Academic Dean of the Pacific School of Religion, shares the following insight on the Luke passage.
“The statement of the “chasm “ that exists between the rich man and Lazarus is a reality about our own apathy (as middle class North Americans) and numbness in the face of overwhelming poverty and suffering. It is a statement about how we are numbed until we become indifferent by the enormity of suffering world over.” [2]
Dr. Matsuoka stated that there is a great chasm fixed between those of us who live in affluence and those who are suffering from economic, social, and political devastations in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and in our own cities. He talks of the chasm fixed between the culture of the “contented” and the underclass. He concludes by saying that, “If faith communities are the embodiment of the good news, these communities are an opportunity for us of courage to see the world for what it is – a world ruled by powers and forces that derive their strength from our natural fear of destruction and our natural need for self-preservation at any cost, even at the cost of dismissing the very images of God.” He then urges people “to turn your heart and your eyes away from the contained private world of self-preoccupation, even self-preoccupation with our own pain, to the deep pain of the larger world. “We are called to a deeper accountability in the world full of Lazarus (people).” [3]
Over the past week we have been overwhelmed by stories and images of violence trickling out of Burma, now commonly known as Myanmar. What started as a peaceful demonstration turned into a violent suppression by the Myanmarian military junta.
The military dictatorship has ruled Burma since 1962 – for 45 years. Burma is the most militarized country in the world. [4] “Nearly half a century of military misrule has turned resource-rich Myanmar into a shambles, with a ranking of 130 out of 177 countries on the UN human development index and a per-capita gross domestic product lower than that of Sudan or Chad.” [5]
Aung San Suu Kyi’s party, the National League for Democracy, won a clear and popular mandate in free elections in 1990; however, she has been living under house arrest for the most part since July 20, 1989 – the year the military junta changed the country’s name from Burma to Myanmar. Suu Kyi, advocate of non-violent resistance, was subsequently awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 for her struggle for freedom and democracy in Burma.
Olivia Ward, a foreign affairs reporter for Toronto Star, reported on Friday, September 28, 2007:
“The crackdown began Wednesday when soldiers and police fired tear gas, clubbed protesters and arrested up to 200 (Buddhist) monks in an attempt to quash the upraising, the largest since the rebellion by students and (Buddhist) monks in 1988, in which more than 3,000 (Buddhist monks and students) were killed.” [6]
The Globe and Mail reported that at least nine people – including (Buddhist) monks – were killed at the Myanmarian junta’s hand. British diplomatic sources said that there was evidence that one monastery was raided before dawn. (Buddhist) monks were ‘badly beaten’ and hauled away, leaving large amounts of blood in their dormitories. [7]
In 2005 American writer, Amy Tan, wrote a fiction novel situated in Myanmar called Saving Fish from Drowning.
Tan began her book with a fable from which her book title is derived:
“A pious man explained to his followers: ‘It is evil to take lives and noble to save them. Each day I pledge to save a hundred lives. I drop my net in the lake and scoop out a hundred fishes. I place the fishes on the bank, where they flop and twirl. Don’t be scared, I tell those fishes. I am saving you from drowning. Soon enough, the fishes grow calm and lie still. Yet, sad to say, I am always too late. The fishes expire. And because it is evil to waste anything, I take those dead fishes to market and I sell them for a good price. With the money I receive, I buy more nets so I can save more fishes.’” [8]
The fisherman is an apt metaphor for the military junta and their cronies who plunder and pillage and justify their actions in Burma. It is no wonder Amy Tan has been banned from Myanmar since the publication of the book.
Andrea Okrentowich wrote in her review of Saving Fish from Drowning.
“The underlying truth throughout Saving Fish from Drowning is that of human nature; how one perceives themselves and the world around them. This novel demonstrates how one reacts to suffering on their part or others, physical or emotional. At what point does an individual drop their shields and see their surroundings as (they are) meant to be seen? If the circumstances are beyond their perception of the norm, at what point will an individual give up hope? Does one have the ability to bend their reality in order to survive? And at what cost?” [9]
As I was reflecting on the words of Jesus from Luke and the uprising for freedom in Burma, the questions from the book review kept coming back to me.
• At what point do you drop your shields and see your surroundings as they are meant to be seen?
• If the circumstances are beyond your perception of the norm, at what point will you give up hope?
• Do you have the ability to bend your reality in order to survive?
• And at what cost?”
According to Jesus, the rich man chose to see his surroundings by bending reality rather than dropping his shields to see his surroundings as they were meant to be seen. He chose apathy – originating from the Greek α- “not” and πάθος (pathos)” to mean “not suffering” or “indifference to feeling” – over empathy or compassion – i.e., identifying pains of others and suffering with them.
Choosing apathy, according to Jesus, was sin. Unwillingness or inability to live out one’s faith is sin.
Last week, Burmese Buddhist monks and students rose up to peacefully demonstrate for the liberation of their people knowing that the violent and brutal suppression of 1988 may repeat itself. They began with reciting Metta Sutra – the Buddhist virtue of metta (“unconditional love and kindness”). [10] “Excesses of the (military) regime, and the wretchedness of the Burmese people, have driven the monks to the streets,” says Pricilla Clapp, former chief of mission in the U.S. embassy in Burma. [11]
The people of Burma have risen up once again to live out their belief that unconditional love and kindness ought to be practiced in their land. Theravada Buddhism, a school of Buddhism 90% of Burmese is part of, teaches that each person is a potential Buddha. Each individual can attain Buddhahood, by various practices. People of Burma can no longer bend the reality of a country ruled in fear in order to survive. They rose to free themselves from God within themselves being distorted and destroyed by the military dictatorship of the 45 years.
People and countries around the globe are standing with those standing up for love and kindness. On Thursday evening a former colleague of mine joined more than 150 people gathered at Nathan Phillips Square to show support for the demonstrators and Buddhist monks who stood up for justice and freedom in Burma.
One thing I know for sure is that even brutal oppression cannot and will not suppress people’s desire for freedom and compassion toward one another. When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace.
At what cost do we bend reality as it was meant to be seen?
May the great compassion of Buddha move the people of Burma as they seek liberation for its people. May we, the followers of Jesus of Nazareth – the one who sided with the downtrodden and the oppressed – hear the challenges of the parable and bear the cost.
Amen.
--------
[1] Luke 16:19-31, Sermon Writer:Resource for Lectionary Preaching, http://www.lectionary.org/EXEG-English/NT/ENT03-Luke/Luke%2016.19-31.htm
[2] Fumitaka Matsuoka, The Lazarus World,
http://www.psr.edu/page.cfm?l=89&id=24.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Olivia Ward, Spiritual Warriors, Toronto Star (Saturday, September 29, 2007), Section AA2.
[5] Marcus Gee, The hidden ‘lady’ for whom they struggle, The Globe and Mail, (Saturday, September 29, 2007), A23.
[6] Olivia Ward, World & Comment, Toronto Star (Friday, September 28, 2007), Section AA1.
[7] Aung Hla Tun, Toll mounts as brutal regime bares its teeth, The Globe and Mail, (Friday, September 28, 2007), A16.
[8] Amy Tan, Saving Fish from Drowning, (G. P. Putnam’s Sons: New York, 2005), 6.
[9] Andrea Okrentowich, An Essay on Amy Tan’s Novel Saving Fish from Drowning,
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/54600/an_essay_on_amy_tans_novel_saving_fish.html.
[10] BurmaNet News,
http://www.burmanet.org/news/2007/09/25/all-burma-monks-alliance-and-88-generation-students-joint-statement-of-abma-and-88-students-unofficial-translation/.
All Burma Monks Alliance and 88 Generation Students: Joint Statement of ABMA and 88 Students (Unofficial translation) Tue 25 Sep 2007 Filed under:
News,
Statement1. The entire people led by monks are staging peaceful protest to be freed from general crises of politics, economic and social by reciting Metta Sutra.
2. The ongoing protest is being joined by monks, nuns, Member of Parliaments, students, ethnics, artistes, intelligentsia and the people from all walks of life which is the biggest unity seen in last 20 years.
3. In this demonstration, we need to show we are deserved democracy by upholding the following 3 slogans adopted in consensus by the monks and endorsed by the entire people.
(a) Economic well-being
(b) Releasing political prisoners
(c) National Reconciliation
4. The entire people must aware the danger of government’s anti-strike counter- measure and violent crush by drawing lessons and experiences from 88 uprising, need to form the Mass Movement Committee and Anti-Violence Committee to prevent from such a violent crackdown.
5. The monks and students will not hesitate and not be deterred from any form of intimidation and violent crackdown will join hands with all the people and continue our struggle bravely and resolutely step by step for our beloved country.
Signed by
All Burma Monks Alliance(1) U Aw Bar Tha (2) U Gambiya (3) U Khe Mein Da (4) U Pakata
88 Generation Students(1) Htay Kywe (2) Tun Myint Naung (3) Hla Myo Naung (4) Aung Thu
[11] Olivia Ward, Spiritual Warriors, Toronto Star (Saturday, September 29, 2007), Section AA2.
