We live in a world where injustice is a historical, cultural, and social phenomenon. From the favelas of Rio de Janeiro in Brazil to the developing China and even to the heart of Europe, poverty and destitution is one of the greatest problems that humans are facing. In that context of injustice permeating human history, it is acknowledged that the official Church has been often aligned with the strong and tyrants of this world and sided with oppressive regimes and governments[1] and that has been a “Society for the Preservation of the Privileged and the Prosperous”.[2] This is why people often are questioning Churches’ attitude regarding social injustice. Therefore it is very important to clear up if the Holy Scriptures are responsible for this attitude or if the Church as an institution and its representatives disregarded and violated the admonitions and laws given by God. The Gospel of Luke gives valuable insights about the attitude of the Christian Church and its members towards the poor and the indigents of this world. Trying to approach the social issue of poverty as it is described in Lukan theology, this article is going initially to make a brief overview of what are the unique points found exclusively in his gospel. It will also attempt to analyze the poor’s blessing in the Lukan Beatitudes, to have a closer look to the story of the rich young ruler and it’s reflection to Zacchaeus story. Finally  the early Church community described in the book of Acts is going to be the synopsis and the climax of Luke’s theology about the socially less favored classes of this world, providing God’s vision for a broken world.

The gospel of Poor

The gospel of Luke describes Jesus as “ the bearer of burdens for the poor and all in need” and often is called ‘the gospel for the poor’. Many unique stories, parables and teachings appear to this gospel concerning the issue of poverty. It is in Luke that Jesus fulfilling Isaiah’s prophecy comes to preach the good news to the poor and to liberate the captives, the blind and the oppressed from their burdens (4:18-21). Only Luke is advising people to invite the poor into dinner rather than the rich (14:12-14) mentioning in the parable of the messianic supper that it is only the poor, maimed and blind who are invited after the refusal of the rich (14:15-24). Luke is the one among the synoptics describing Jesus’ admonition that “a man’s life consists not in the abundance of his possessions” (12:15) recounting the parable of the foolish rich man (12:13-21) and Jesus’ final appeal to the audience to sell their possessions and to give alms (12:33,34). The parable of the rich man and Lazarus where the rich man has eternal consequences for his indifference and selfishness is also unique to the gospel of Luke (16:19-31) whereas it is an ultimate warning to the Pharisees, which were ‘lovers of money’ (16:14). The story with the young ruler exclusively in Luke gives a hint that he is ‘very rich’ and Jesus advises him to sell his possession and to give it to the poor (18:18-25). The story of Zacchaeus who is called ‘rich’ is mentioned only in Luke’s gospel (19:1-10), where Jesus is rejoicing on Zacchaeus’ decision to give the half of his goods to the poor. Only in Luke we find the instruction to give our money or cloak without hoping to receive anything back (6:29-35). Finally it is in Luke’s Beatitudes that the poor and hungry are blessed (6:20,21) whereas the Woes are targeting those who are rich and full of food.[3]

Blessed are the Poor (6:20,21)

“Poverty” is an indeterminate term used both to describe the socioeconomic circumstances of a society where one lives, and the real-life situation of the person characterized by the term.[4] The ancient Greek word πτωχός (ptochόs) on the one hand is referred to someone lacking spiritual worth but mainly describes someone who is economically disadvantaged            (therefore dependent on others for support), extremely inferior in quality (miserable, shabby) and someone who thrusts on divine resources, namely a poor.[5] It is a reality that poverty can barely be perceived by the human mind.[6] Additionally, in the Biblical context, poverty is a condition detrimental and hostile to human dignity, which is totally opposite to God’s expressed will.[7] Therefore, the determinant reason to preach the message of hope to the poor and outcasts is to give them back their lost dignity and to inspire them to take charge of their future.[8] Consequently, the poor are not only experiencing deprivation of the basic needs, but they also have an immense need for human dignity.

Therefore, there is a great mistake committed, when people are marginalized from society. This attitude is not merely an actual refusal to support them by considering them as ‘nobodies’ and abandoning them in to their ‘fate’; it is also a refusal to the dignity they definitely are entitled to, as children of God. The world today is hungry not only for bread but also for love, for compassion, for care and for empathy. This is primarily the Christian humanistic approach to these lower layers of the social stratification. Injustice and hunger are not just socio-economic challenges but ethical and human problems, determining the virtues by which we experience our faith and our relationship with Deity. [9] People are thirsty for the presence of Christ. And it is true that in many developed countries, people, even Christians, have everything in abundance, except the presence of this goodness. This is a principle of great value that the Gospel of Luke, conveys throughout the ages.

According to the Dutch theologian Oepke Noordmans (1871-1956), there are two gospels, distinct from one another: “a gospel for sinners and a gospel for the poor”.[10] God has a significant message for the weaker groups of the social stratification. However, are the poor justified because of their situation? Does poor are identified with lack of a sinful, selfish and egoistic nature? Definitely not. It is their condition producing specific characteristics, which qualify them. Rich people feel self-sufficiency because of their wealth and they don’t have fear or need of God.[11] Luke indicates that corruption seems to be interconnected with wealth (16:1-11).[12] There are also existential dimensions on how they perceive themselves and others in terms of their wealth: “If anyone claims that he is greater because he owns more, he is guilty of a terrible confusion between being and having…but one does not exist in order to have”.[13]

Contrariwise the poor experience an unlimited trust and dependence in God, without keeping things for themselves, always ready to share and living with humility.[14] Indeed it is an experiential reality that poor give more and more easily, than the rich.[15] Maybe this daily dependence on God rather than one’s possessions is a major reason why in the poor or developing countries Christianity is increasing in contrast with the wealthy countries, which are de-Christianized. Therefore, even if the literary poor and destitute are the direct recipients of Lukan beatitudes, it is not “poverty or reaches per se” which are blessed or rejected but the respective trust or rejection of God.[16]

The poor’s gospel, has an immense impact in theology and more particular to Christology describing God’s grace and love which has revealed through Christ, not just in a general and universal manner, but in a very specific way, to those that never experienced it.[17] Jesus himself has been related to the poor of this world in two ways; on the one hand He is their shepherd leading them to His Kingdom; but also as their brother living a life of total poverty similar to theirs, without any property, stable home, or wealth; renouncing not only riches but also all its derivatives such as pride, political power or influence in social relations.[18] We could dare to claim that the poor’s life is an antitype to the life of Jesus on earth and vice versa. Finally, Jesus truly was so much identified with the poor that it is obvious, for all those belonging to Him and to His community that the identification with the hungry, the outcast and the homeless is not optional or peripheral but primary and basic.[19]

Rich Young Ruler (18:18-25)

This narrative, found also in Mark (10:17-31) and Matthew (19:16-30), has a unique reference at Luke. The young man is a ‘ruler’ and ‘very rich’.[20] Jesus through His dialogue with this man, revealed the relationship between wealth – almsgiving and their relationship with God’s law -more precisely between the letter and the spirit of the law- and with salvation. In the question of the young ruler, how can he inherit eternal life, Jesus listed the commandments found in the second table of the Decalogue, referred to the relation among humans.[21] When He received the answer that all these have been kept, Jesus revealed the real spirit of the law: “If you really keep this set of commandments and therefore you love your neighbor, as yourself, (Lk 10:27) then sell everything and give it to the poor”. Jesus in this context is functioning as a new lawgiver, a new Moses. He is introducing a new reality where true Christians are not rulers, oppressing, fighting and dominating but humble, self-denial and self-sacrificing people.[22]

Additionally Jesus wanted to point out to this man that if he failed to be consistent with the second set of commandments that indicates for sure that he failed to obey also the first set. The ruler had not only failed to love his fellowmen, but he failed to love God (1^st John 4:20).[23] Jesus through this strategy wanted to convey a message to that man: “If you want to enter life, then keep the commandments. However, once you see that you cannot keep the commandments you will realize your inability to do so and thus your need for Me.”[24] This is why His next appeal to him was: ‘follow me’. However the love for riches prohibited this young ruler to abandon his possessions, and to follow Jesus; revealing that there is a big possibility for people to keep the law of God in a really legalistic way. The love for their wealth portrays the depth of their hypocrisy, and reveals their inadequacy towards God and towards others. A final eschatological dimension is given at the end of this story, sealing the eternal destiny for a man who claims to keep the law but hardens his heart to the poor and is reluctant to the calling of Jesus.

Zacchaeus (19:1-10)

There is a prospect clearly revealing Luke’s Hellenistic social morality, which is not merely a renouncing of the possessions of rich, but the practice of almsgiving attributed in the service of the poor and destitute. The response to the incident and the unfortunate appeal Jesus made to the rich young ruler, is found to the next chapter; Zacchaeus is the one that willingly is donating half of his riches to the poor without being asked by Jesus; a remarkable action in the context of the Cynic worldview of renunciation of possessions.[25] Zacchaeus was a tax collector and therefore a hated and disdained member of the society, an outsider. However, Jesus being constantly connected with poor beggars and generally ‘unacceptable’ people, now He becomes friend with a rich rather than a poor outcast; He reflects God’s grace which is extended and encompassing every human, even the wealthy ones. The invitation to Zacchaeus was a moment that the tax collector found in Jesus more than himself; “it was a moment of truth in which Zacchaeus realized a self-acceptance based on Jesus acceptance”.[26]

Zacchaeus also represents the Lukan response to the insight expressed at the previous chapter (18:24,25): “Is it possible for the rich to be saved?” [27] The proclamation of the Gospel, is also for the rich: they have to experience poor’s sufferings in order to inherit the Kingdom of God and be recipients of the blessings along with the poor,[28] whereas the only justifiable use of wealth is to use it for making charities (Lk 16:12, 12:33, 11:41).[29] Members of the Christian community who are prosperous and privileged, when they take the decision to start be caring and compassionate for those who suffer, will definitely experience a closer and more qualitative relationship with Jesus.[30] These insights are indicating that Jesus did not reject the wealthy people, but He made an appeal to them in order to be converted, to become just and to follow Him.[31] Luke therefore was indeed the ‘evangelist of the poor, but also irrefutably the ‘evangelist of the rich’, trying to draw also them into his message.[32]

Church Community

In the book of Acts (2: 41-47 & 4: 32-35) we have a description of Luke’s second response to rich young ruler’s reaction to Jesus, concerning the needs of his community. The early Christian Church is practicing exactly what the young ruler was unwilling to apply. It is a new unity providing support for its destitute members. What Jesus was envisioning for the life of this young man now it is a reality among His people. It seems as though the Kingdom and its fruits, personal and institutional are visible.[33] He is the Founder of a new community where social bonds are strong, with absence of social injustice where all are equal in status and worth towards God. A community that fulfills the promise and prophecy found in Deuteronomy 15:4: “But there will be no poor among you”; therefore the early Church “symbolizes the new messianic people of God in its perfect form”.[34]

This attitude is not unnoticed by God; it is one of the major constituents by which He blessed this community with spiritual and arithmetical fruits (Acts 2: 42,47). The legacy of this first Christian community is also highly influential to the Didache of the Twelve Apostles one of the earliest Christian documents: “Do not turn away the needy, but share everything with your brother, and do not say that is your own. For if you have what is eternal in common, how much more should you have what is transient”.[35] Christian theology and mission should be oriented to the poor, outcasts and oppressed of the society and that should always be considerate with their distress and sufferings. In these terms, it should never be detached from social involvement and as one of the ‘evangelists’ of liberation theology Jose Bonino declared: “Theology has to stop explaining the world, and start transforming it”.[36]

Conclusion

“In the contemporary struggle of the disinherited and the powerless to become subjects, only a theology ‘of the people, by the people, and for the people’ can be the bearer of the Christian message” [37] Maybe the Church has done crucial mistakes but God has an ultimate concern for the oppressed and the poor. Lukan theology is clearly portraying a God who through Jesus Christ has identified with justice, human dignity and the liberation of the oppressed; a God who is inviting people to experience His unconditional and perpetual love, and thus to develop mutual loving relationships between them in order to enter in a covenant with Him;[38] a God who offers to the poor the assurance that He is with them; giving a promise of the present, through the fellowship of a new Church community where equality, compassion and justice exist; and giving the hope of a glorious future where the “eschatological reversal” between poor and rich, powerless and powerful is going to be the new reality of His Kingdom.[39]

Yiannis Samaras
Theologian, Pastor

[1] Alister E. McGrath, Historical Theology: Introduction to the History of Christian Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998), p. 255.

[2] William K. McElvaney, Good News Is Bad News Is Good News (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1980), p. 3.

[3] Richard A. Burridge, Four Gospels, One Jesus?: A Symbolic Reading, SPCK Classic edition (London: SPCK Publishing, 2013), pp. 118,119.

[4] Wolfgang Stegemann, The Gospel and the Poor (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984), p. 13.

[5] A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, ed. by Frederick William Danker, 3rd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001), p. 896.

[6] Charles Elliot, Comfortable Compassion? Poverty, Power and the Church (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1987), p. 11.

[7] Gustavo Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation, Revised Edition with a New Introduction (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1988), p. 165.

[8] Liberation Theology: A Documentary History, ed. by Alfred T. Hennelly (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1990), p. 296.

[9] The Poor and the Church, ed. by Norbert Greinacher, Alois Muller (New York: Seabury Press, 1977), p. 14.

[10] Coenraad Boerrma, The Poor Side of Europe: The Church and the (New) Poor of Western Europe (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1989), p. 42.

[11] Julio De Santa Ana, Good News to the Poor: The Challenge of the Poor in the History of the Church (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1979), p. 8.

[12] The Poor and the Church, ed. by Norbert Greinacher, Alois Muller (New York: Seabury Press, 1977), p. 38.

[13] Ana, p. 71.

[14] Ana, p. 21.

[15] Alois Muller, p. 101.

[16] Walter Pilgrim, Good News to the Poor: Wealth and Poverty in Luke and Acts (Minneapolis, Minn: Augsburg Publishing House, 1981), p. 77.

[17] Boerrma, p. 72.

[18] Lee Palmer Wandel, Always among Us: Images of the Poor in Zwingli’s Zurich (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 1.

[19] McElvaney, p. 27,28.

[20] Pilgrim, p. 89.

[21] Alan P. Stanley, ‘The Rich Young Ruler and Salvation’, Bibliotheca Sacra, 163 (2006), 46–62 (p. 48).

[22] Barbara Nelson Gingerich, ‘Property and the Gospel : Two Reformation Perspectives’, Mennonite Quarterly Review, 59 (1985), 248–67 (pp. 257,258).

[23] Stanley, p. 52.

[24] Stanley, p. 51.

[25] Stegemann, pp. 49,50.

[26] McElvaney, p. 54,55.

[27] Pilgrim, p. 129.

[28] Hennelly, p. 296.

[29] Alois Muller, p. 38.

[30] McElvaney, p. 51.

[31] Ana, p. 23.

[32] Boerrma, p. 53.

[33] Elliot, p. 125.

[34] Alois Muller, p. 41.

[35] Boerrma, p. 17.

[36] McGrath, p. 255.

[37] Gutierrez, Liberation and Change, p. 170.

[38] McElvaney, p. 33.

[39] Pilgrim, pp. 160–162.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alois Muller, Norbert Greinacher, ed., The Poor and the Church (New York: Seabury Press, 1977)

Ana, Julio De Santa, Good News to the Poor: The Challenge of the Poor in the History of the Church (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1979)

Boerrma, Coenraad, The Poor Side of Europe: The Church and the (New) Poor of Western Europe (Geneva: World Council of Churches, 1989)

Burridge, Richard A., Four Gospels, One Jesus?: A Symbolic Reading, SPCK Classic edition (London: SPCK Publishing, 2013)

Danker, Frederick William, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd edn (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001)

Elliot, Charles, Comfortable Compassion? Poverty, Power and the Church (London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1987)

Gingerich, Barbara Nelson, ‘Property and the Gospel : Two Reformation Perspectives’, Mennonite Quarterly Review, 59 (1985), 248–67

Gutierrez, Gustavo, A Theology of Liberation, Revised Edition with a New Introduction (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1988)

———, Liberation and Change (Atlanta: John Knox Press, 1977)

Hennelly, Alfred T., ed., Liberation Theology: A Documentary History (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1990)

McElvaney, William K., Good News Is Bad News Is Good News (Maryknoll, N.Y: Orbis Books, 1980)

McGrath, Alister E., Historical Theology: Introduction to the History of Christian Thought (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998)

Pilgrim, Walter, Good News to the Poor: Wealth and Poverty in Lukeand Acts (Minneapolis, Minn: Augsburg Publishing House, 1981)

Stanley, Alan P., ‘The Rich Young Ruler and Salvation’, Bibliotheca Sacra, 163 (2006), 46–62

Stegemann, Wolfgang, The Gospel and the Poor (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1984)

Wandel, Lee Palmer, Always among Us: Images of the Poor in Zwingli’s Zurich (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990)