That was the Gospel reading for today, as you know if you were at Mass. I understand that this is widely regarded as a difficult passage to interpret, because it is a parable about a guy who is rewarded and commended for his sneakiness and dishonesty.
This is my take on it, which will be one of my main interpretations until someone proposes a much better one to me or someone of sufficient authority tells me it's a bad one. I think, however, it's at least a passable one because it solves the difficulties of the passage, leads to charity, and is in accord with the rule of faith. I see St. Francis as one of the greatest "dishonest" prudent stewards.
Oftentimes in parables the master of a house is the Lord. But here I see the rich man as the World. And so the "dishonesty" of the steward is not to be interpreted as dishonesty in the absolute sense, but only the relative (for instance, a "good" thief in the relative sense means someone who is good at being a thief; a "good" thief in the absolute sense is like St. Dismas). When you take the world lightly, the world is not very forgiving to you. But when it calls you to account, instead of trying to make amends with it, give its goods away in acts of mercy and gain the communion and brotherhood of those who are no friends of the rich man. The world may not be very happy about this, but it can't help but respect you.
In the end, it was prudent to be a bad servant of the world/rich man and rip him off, so to speak, because in the end you won't be judged on how well you served the world. But the communion of saints, which you gained at the price of some temporary grief from the world - you will value that beyond price.
1) In early modern domestic handbooks, it is often debated whether it is better to employ honest and virtuous servants who will not cheat you or devious tricksters who, though dangerous, could use their "skills" for their master's benefit. Jesus might be drawing on ancient thoughts concerning what makes a good servant.
2) That being said, I think a lot of the parables have surprising degrees of "badness" in them, for rhetorical effect. Consider that when Christ talks about the persistence of prayer, he compares us to whiney old women and the Father to an unjust, tyrannical judge.
3) It's a form of classical paradox, to praise the qualities of a bad thing in order to show true virtue.
If we applied the same energies towards eternal wealth that we applied towards ephemeral treasures, we'd have it made.
Posted by: PeterTerp | November 11, 2006 at 10:20 AM