ARROGANCE or WEALTH

THE RICH YOUNG RULER PASSAGE PSYCHOLOGICALLY REVISITED

By Rolando Suffos MD

Havana

Unfortunately, this passage seems, at first sight, to have nothing to do with me. Born, raised and living in Cuba, to be or to become rich, at least from a financial perspective, is quite out of the picture. So, I could think that skipping this portion of the Gospels would have no consequences in my spiritual life. Nevertheless, an unbiased approach to this passage reveals vital teachings for everybody.

In my modest opinion, it would be very difficult to grasp the passage purpose without having in mind that Christ was fully human and fully divine. Jesus was not a speaking statue whose flat uncolored words could be totally foreign to the psychological elaboration requested by a particular circumstance. The meeting with this rich young man was indeed special and demanded the employing of such procedures. Christ mastered them perfectly well.

Matthew: 19:16-22: narrates the encounter as follow: 16 “Now behold, one came and said to him, “Good Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may have eternal life?” 17 So He said to him, “Why do you call me good? None is good, but one, that is, God. But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.” 18 He said to him, “Which ones?” Jesus said, “‘You shall not murder’, ‘You shall not commit adultery’, ‘You shall not steal,’ ‘You shall not bear false testimony,’ 19 ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ “20 the young man said to him, “All these things I have kept from my youth. What do I still lack?” 21 Jesus said to him, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 22 But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.”

It calls our attention as a red light that this young man had, besides money, a not very modest opinion of himself. Luke 18:18 tell us that he was: “a certain ruler.” The overbearing pride he demonstrates along the above recorded conversation is a frequent and sometimes very prominent feature in people occupying ruling positions. That exaggerated self-esteem, probably stimulated –as it happens nowadays– by the flattery of subordinates or followers, made him feel superior. So much he believed in that superiority that he thought of himself as perfect. Even when Jesus had plainly told him that only God was good, this man didn't hesitate in asserting that he was also good.

At the same time he was saying that Christ was wrong, because as his statement intended to demonstrate there were, at least, two good ones: namely God, and he himself. Evidently the young ruler didn't recognize any moral difference between his person and the Divinity. He was as good as God; he had fulfilled the law and even reached the humanly inaccessible summit of loving his neighbor as himself. His words:”All these things I have kept from my youth” were the crown of a monument to self exaltation built on a foundation of hypocrisy. Christ was about to demolish it with just one sentence.

Let us continue with the story. What seems to have overflowed the self-sufficiency cup was the _expression “What do I still lack?” At this, one can not help but think that, were he speaking sincerely, this man was able to fulfill anything. That is legalism raised to absurdity. It was here where Christ deflated the young man’s hot air balloon in which he had ascended to the heights of absolute justification. Christ perforated it with a suggestion derived from the claims of perfection and infinite kindness already made by the person he was speaking to. That “sell what you have and give to the poor” left him stunned. If this potentate had really loved his neighbor as himself, and if his willingness to even do something more were true, Christ’s proposal would have meant no impossible sacrifice for him.

When he went away; this attitude clarified two facts which, judged by the young man’s legalism, would not allow him to have eternal life on his own merits. One is that he didn't love his neighbor as himself. This we have already seen. The other is his false testimony; when his words implied he would do something he didn't really have any intention of accomplishing.

In my fallible opinion, this passage teaches that eternal life cannot be earned by law keeping, and that it is not wealth but wealth related arrogance what hinders the entrance of the affluent in the Kingdom of heaven. The latter opinion stems from the passage itself and the answer Jesus gives to a very human concern raised in Peters’ voice. Read from Luke 18: 28-30 this portion says: “28 then Peter said, “See, we have left all and followed You.” 29 So He said to them, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or parents, or brothers or wife or children, for the sake of the kingdom of God, 30 “who shall not receive many times more in this present time, and in the age to come eternal life.”

We could better appreciate the meaning of that “many times more in this present time” if we keep in mind that not all disciples were poor. Judged by his position as tax collector Matthew must have been a man in good economic situation. It is then clear that Jesus came to bring men salvation, without reducing them to poverty in the process. “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever [rich or poor] believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.”

Would you like to exchange opinions or comments with Dr. Suffos? He will gladly answer any e-mail directed to him (suffos21@yahoo.es).

Copyright Rolando Suffos