Embracing Prodigals: Overcoming Authoritative Religion by Embodying Jesus’ Nurturing Grace

By John Sanders

Do you wonder why some people you know hold theological and political views that blow your mind but they find quite reasonable? Today, Christians are at odds over how to understand the Bible, atonement, and salvation of non-Christians. They are also polarized over issues such as same-gender marriage, income inequality, and health care. Two social science models, Nurturant and Authoritative, explain this divide. Values are at the heart of our disagreements. Nurturants prize empathy and cooperation while Authoritatives cherish obedience to law and order. Each group has distinct core values and these lead them to embrace different theological, moral, and political views. This book explains the divide and makes the case that Jesus embodied the Nurturant way of life. He modeled empathy, grace, forgiveness, and care for those beyond his own tribe. The Nurturant and Authoritative approaches have competed for thousands of years but contemporary research shows that the Nurturant way of life produces better mental and spiritual health as well as superior communities in which to live.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Cascade Books
• Release date: Jul 31, 2020
• ISBN: 9781725264083

John Sanders

John Sanders is Professor of Philosophy and Religion at Huntington College, Huntington, Indiana.

Book preview

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to a multitude of people who assisted me on this book. In particular, my wife, Jody, offered many good suggestions and, more importantly, she models the nurturing way of life. My friend Aaron Simmons has participated in countless conversations with me over the years. His wisdom has been of inestimable benefit. Several of my colleagues at Hendrix College deserve a shout-out for sharing their expertise with me: Jay McDaniel, Kiril Kolev, Robert Williamson, Leslie Zorwick, and Jay Barth . Bonnie Howe, Kevin Carnahan, Chris and Thea Spatz, along with two of my children, Mandie and Caleb, offered insights and encouragement along the way. I am grateful to a wide array of people who read parts of the manuscript and provided feedback: Brenda Colijn, Karen Winslow, Curtis Holtzen, Alan Padgett, Barry Callen, Dwight Erickson, Norrie Friesen, Josh Norris, Ginny Ahrens, Paul Kuan Richards, Colin Bagby, Devon Dundee, Andrew Fiser, Terri York, and Tricia Burris.

Introduction

Parents and Prodigals

Jesus was a rabbi who liked to tell stories. One of his most famous stories is the parable of the Prodigal Son. This story sets the stage for this book so even if you are familiar with the story, please follow along. There was a man who had two sons.  The younger of them said, ‘Father, give me the share of the property that will belong to me.’ So he divided his property between them. A few days later the younger son gathered all he had and traveled to a distant country, and there he squandered his property in dissolute living.   When he had spent everything, a severe famine took place throughout that country, and he began to be in need. So he went and hired himself out to one of the citizens of that country, who sent him to his fields to feed the pigs. He would gladly have filled himself with   the pods that the pigs were eating; and no one gave him anything. But when he came to himself he said, ‘How many of my father’s hired hands have bread enough and to spare, but here I am dying of hunger!  I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you;   I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands.’

So he set off for home. While he was still far off, his father saw him and was filled with disgust and anger at the son. The father waited in the house. When the son arrived he said, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son.’ The father replied, ‘You got that right. You are a disrespectful child whose way of life failed to honor me as the Ten Commandments requires.’ The son said, ‘Father, forgive me.’ The father replied: ‘If I forgave you and welcomed you back home I would be treating your sins lightly. Just as we cannot be soft on crime, I cannot pass over your sin. You subverted the social order God established. If I let you off free of charge that would undermine society. Divine justice requires you to get what you deserve. You must be punished and pay the price in order to satisfy my indignation and balance the moral books.’ Then the son said to the father, ‘please let me be one of your hired hands to pay for my sin.’ The father agreed, saying, ‘Exodus 21 allows for you to be a slave for the next six years. If you work hard in the fields, you can pay off the tremendous debt you owe to my honor. Do this well and you will earn my acceptance.’

When the older brother came in from working in the fields the father said to him, ‘You are an upright son who honors me by obeying my authority. Your deviant brother returned today and I agreed to let him pay off his sin by working for us. Keep a good eye on him for me until his account is paid in full.’"

The first half of this story is the way Jesus told it but the second half is completely different.¹ Here is another version of the story which is also different from the one Jesus told. The first part is the same: the son receives his share of the inheritance, leaves home, and ends up in a desperate situation. He realizes that there is plenty of food at home so he makes the long trek back. While he was a long way off the father saw him, ran to meet him, and gave him a high five. The son said to his father, After I departed my situation deteriorated so I decided to return home again. The father said, It does not matter what you did, you are always okay with me. I always affirm what my children do and never make judgments about them. You know that I do not have expectations about how you live your life. I just accept you as you are. The father threw a party that night and when the older son came in from the fields he went into the house. When he saw his brother he said, Everything is cool between us, welcome back. The party went well and they all had a wonderful time.

In the first adaptation, the father is very judgmental and makes the son earn his way back into the family. The words and actions of the father in this story make a lot of sense to us because this is how many fathers we know would react. The values and behaviors of the father in this account fit with what I call the Authoritative parent. Not only is this approach common in families, many Christians believe God operates just like the father in this version. They develop theologies and ways of relating in church life that manifest these values. In the second adaptation, the father makes no moral judgments. There is no need for forgiveness because the father makes no moral evaluations about the kids. Fewer parents practice what is called the Permissive parent approach.

The story Jesus actually told is at odds with both the Authoritative father and the Permissive father versions. The story Jesus told has the same first two scenes in which the son receives his inheritance, leaves, and ends up in a perilous situation. He said, I will get up and go to my father, and I will say to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; I am no longer worthy to be called your son; treat me like one of your hired hands.’ Now is where Jesus’ version of the story differs from the two told above. Jesus says the father saw the son a long way off and was filled with compassion, not disgust and anger. The father ran to meet him instead of waiting in the house. The father embraced him and kissed him instead of making the son grovel at his feet. Then the father said to his servants, ‘Quickly, bring out a robe—the best one—and put it on him; put a ring on his finger and sandals on his feet. And get the fatted calf and kill it, and let us eat and celebrate; for this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found!’ When the oldest son came in from working in the field he heard music and dancing and so asked one of the servants what was going on. The servant said his father was throwing a party for the safe return of the younger son. The older son became angry and refused to celebrate. He sulked outside instead. When his father became aware of this, he went out of the house and pleaded with the son to come in and join the party. However, the older son thought the father was acting immorally. He replied, Listen! For all these years I have been working like a slave for you, and I have never disobeyed your command. . . . But when this son of yours came back, who has devoured your property with prostitutes, you killed the fatted calf for him! His father replied, Son, all that is mine is yours but we had to celebrate because your brother was dead and has come to life; he was lost but has been found.

Three pieces of background information help us fill out what Jesus meant by this story. First, Jesus tells this story immediately after he tells two other stories about searching and finding lost items. In the first parable, a shepherd had a hundred sheep but one got lost. The shepherd went and found it and brought it home. In the second story, a woman had ten coins and lost one. She searched diligently until she found it. Jesus tells three parables about sheep, coins, and sons that are lost and then recovered. Second, Jesus told these stories in order to answer a question that religious leaders put to him: why did Jesus show acceptance and hospitality to sinners? The term sinners here has a very specific meaning. It means Jewish people who do not practice their religion the way the religious leaders expected them to. For example, they did not keep the Sabbath and were lax about other regulations that God had commanded. According to some religious authorities, Rabbi Jesus should not show acceptance to people who do not follow God until they first change their ways. Third, the request of the younger son to have his share of the inheritance was legitimate in ancient Judaism. However, to take it and leave the country was an outrageous act that cut him off from his family.

With this in mind, we are now in position to understand the ways in which Jesus’ approach to people with problems differs from both the Authoritative and Permissive fathers.² In the Authoritative father version, the father, who represents God, cannot simply forgive and accept the child because he thinks justice demands that we get what we deserve. We must keep the moral books lest society fall apart. However, Jesus tells a very different story. The father does not wait in the house for the son to come and grovel at his feet. Instead, the father goes to meet the son, embraces him, and gives the son what he does not deserve. It is the son, not the father, who says the son is unworthy to be called a son. It is important to note that the father does not frame the situation in terms of disobedient children. Rather, the father frames the situation as the joy parents have when they find their missing child or when a child recovers from a life-threatening situation. By construing the situation as finding his lost son or surviving a life-threatening condition, the father sees the situation very differently than the Authoritative father does.

In Jesus’ story, the oldest son, not the father, gives voice to Authoritative values when he frames the situation as dishonor and the need for judgment. That is why he accuses the father of being unfair and acting immorally. This son says the father is not acting like an Authoritative father should. The older son says the father should make the prodigal earn his acceptance. However, Jesus says God does not demand repayment or punishment in order to bestow divine acceptance. Rather, God lavishes acceptance and forgiveness in order to transform human lives. Ask yourself when you are most open to transformation. When someone condemns you and sternly tells you to shape up? Or, when you feel deeply and profoundly loved?

Returning to Jesus’ version, the older son refuses to go into the house and fulfill his social responsibility to help the father entertain the guests. In spite of this dishonor, the father goes out of the house to talk to the older son as well. He accepts this son as well and invites him to join the party. The story does not tell us whether the older son with Authoritative values accepted the invitation of the father with Nurturing values to enter the house.

In contrast to the Permissive version, Jesus does not say whatever the younger son does is okay. Jesus agrees that the sinners—those Jews not in proper relationship with God—have a problem. Jesus does make evaluations about their condition when he characterizes them as lost and dead. Their situation is dire and definitely not what God wants for them. The son is wrong because he rejected his sonship by cutting himself off from his kin. What he did was to un-son himself so he could not expect to be welcomed back as a family member. The best he could hope for was to become a hired hand. The Permissive father emphasizes acceptance without moral evaluation while the Authoritative father is all about moral judgment, not acceptance. The Nurturant father makes moral evaluations and uses welcome and embrace to transform the child. In common with the Authoritative father, Jesus wants these Jewish people to change their ways. In contrast with the Authoritative father, in order to bring about this transformation the father goes to them, welcomes them with open arms, and calls them his children. Though the son excluded himself from the family, the father never excluded him. God, according to Jesus, does not exclude these Jewish sinners because God’s relationship with them does not depend on their moral performance. The son cannot undo the relationship because the father always kept the son in his heart. Though the younger son sought to un-son himself, the father makes it clear that the young man is his son when he tells the servants to dress him and put a ring on his finger (what servants did for family members). According to Jesus, God prioritizes forgiveness and family relationship over rule keeping. Of course, few of us have done exactly what the prodigal son did. Yet, Jesus tells the story to give us a fundamental model of how God relates to us.

What This Book Is About

This book names two forms of religion—Nurturant and Authoritative—that have butted heads from the time of Abraham to today. These two ways of life have existed for thousands of years in families, religions, and governments. They are competing moral visions of life that are manifested in the way parents raise children, in government policies, and in religious teachings regarding how God deals with people. Teachers and coaches use these orientations when they seek to motivate people. Politicians use them to set policies ranging from crime to health care. During the past fifty years, polarization has greatly increased in the United States over an array of political and cultural issues. The key that explains this divide is the Nurturant and Authoritative moral visions. They represent two deeply opposed views of what constitutes a good person. Each approach believes it has the best set of values, practices, and attitudes for living life properly. Each side believes the stance taken by the other is wrongheaded.

The Authoritative, Nurturing, and Permissive types embody different sets of values that people live by. For instance, Nurturants prioritize traits such as acceptance, empathy, cooperation, perspective taking, and open-mindedness, and they support democracy. Authoritatives cherish obedience to rules, social order, individual responsibility, absolute certainty of the correctness of their views, and lean towards autocratic leaders. Permissive types favor tolerance, open-endedness, and minimalist structure. This book deals primarily with the Nurturing and Authoritative types for several reasons. Social scientists have focused their studies on these two for decades. In addition, the Gospels primarily depict people who follow the Nurturing or Authoritative ways of life. The Authoritative types were the ones who regularly challenged Jesus’ values. Another reason is that in the history of Christianity and particularly in America today, the debates over doctrines and correct practices occur primarily between the Nurturant and Authoritative types. The core values in each view lead Christians to develop different theologies, ways of relating, and stances on social issues. Those with Authoritative values find it natural to affirm ideas such as penal substitution, hell as eternal torment, the Bible as a book of moral absolutes, and corporal punishment. Those with Nurturing values have different understanding of these topics.

The various chapters following lay out the key values in each model. These values motivate people to think and behave the way they do. Cognitive science informs us that much of our reasoning, including thinking about morality, is unconscious. The moral values in these two models, like an iceberg, go largely unnoticed by us yet they shape us in powerful ways. Even if you have not heard the names before, the Nurturing and Authoritative approaches will feel familiar to you. The reason why is that the models name icebergs—the value sets we experience in everyday life and the church.

There are two main claims in this book. The first is that authentic Christianity follows the Nurturing path of Jesus. Jesus came