vicariously, with that son as well. In
truth, of course, most people nowâ€"and very likely most people thenâ€"act both
ways some of the time. (At that point, then, it becomes not a parable
about a type' of person, but about all of us in all our various ways of
being.) The father is sometimes portrayed as long-suffering, and if that
character is taken as a metaphor for God, then that is correct. In
Biblical times, it was almost certainly apprehended that way. Except for
death or misadventure, the sort of broken families that are so common today
were not common then. So it was probably easy for contemporary listeners
to think of the father figure in the story as the always-available, long-
Modern people may find it less easy. They have not known, in their
homes, love and constancy. One person remarked to an interviewer that he
saw his father in the role of the prodigal, rather than himself. This is a
completely new relationship of the reader or listener to the information in
the parable. Modern young people may, therefore, have a hard time figuring
out the parable's message. "This entire generation of young adults has been
deeply affected by living in a society in which the possibility of lasting
commitment is viewed with suspicion and sometimes despair." [4] Therefore,
making theological sense of the relationship between the father and his
sons carries a bigger social burden than it did in Biblical times.
What is that message' The one clear message is that God is
steadfast, always present, no matter where any one, or even all, of His
people might be. He was always there, looking for the son who had gone
away. He was also always there, supporting the son who had stayed. The
implication, in the passage above, is that the dutiful son could have had a
fattened calf, or anything else, had he but asked. "Everything I have is
yours...