Lk. 16:15. He said to them: you make yourselves appear righteous before people, but God knows your hearts, for what is exalted among people is an abomination before God.
The Lord, exposing the hidden wickedness of the Pharisees and showing that, although they assume an appearance of righteousness, they are nevertheless abominable before God because of their self-conceit, says: you present yourselves as righteous before men and think that you alone have been given the ability to understand what is needful and to teach; therefore you also laugh at My words as foolish, wishing to be regarded by the common people as teachers of truth. But in reality it is not so. For "God knows your hearts" and considers you abominable for your high-mindedness and attachment to human glory. "For what is exalted among men is an abomination before God." "Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord" (Prov. 16:5). Therefore you, Pharisees, ought to have lived not for human opinion, "for God has scattered the bones of those who encamp against you" (Ps. 53:5), but rather to have made yourselves righteous before God.
Lk. 16:16. The Law and the Prophets were until John; since that time the Kingdom of God is preached as good news, and everyone enters it by force.
Apparently, this is a separate discourse having nothing in common with what was said above, but to the attentive reader it will not seem inconsistent, but on the contrary very connected with the preceding. The Lord by the aforementioned words taught non-possessiveness and called wealth unrighteous possession, while the Law (Lev. 26:3–9) placed blessings in wealth as well (among other things), and the prophets (Isa. 19) promised earthly goods as a reward. Lest someone, like the Pharisees, say to Him mockingly: what are You saying? You contradict the Law: it blesses with wealth, yet You teach non-possessiveness? — therefore the Lord says: "The Law and the prophets had their time until John," and they taught well, because the listeners were then of a young age. But from the time John appeared, nearly bodiless in his non-possessiveness and non-possessive in his near-bodilessness, and preached the Kingdom of Heaven, earthly goods no longer have their time, and the Kingdom of Heaven is preached. Therefore those who desire heaven must adopt non-possessiveness on earth. Since the prophets and the Law made no mention of the Kingdom of Heaven, they rightly promised earthly goods to people who were still far from perfect and unable to conceive of anything great and manly. Therefore, Pharisees, I rightly teach non-possessiveness, when the imperfect commandments of the Law no longer have their time.
Lk. 16:17. But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fall.
Then, lest anyone say that in the end everything of the Law has been rejected as vain and utterly empty, the Lord says: No! On the contrary, now it is even more fulfilled and accomplished. For what the Law sketched in shadow, speaking figuratively about Christ or about the commandments, is now fulfilled, and not one stroke of it shall be lost. What was indicated there in the form of a shadow concerning Christ is now accomplished in the clearest manner. And the commandments of the Law, given at that time in an accommodated way suited to the understanding of the imperfect, will now have a higher and most perfect meaning.
Lk. 16:18. Everyone who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery, and everyone who marries a woman divorced from her husband commits adultery.
But that the Law spoke imperfectly to the imperfect is evident from the following. For example, the Law, on account of the hardheartedness of the Jews, gave a decree concerning the dissolution of marriage, namely: a husband, if he came to hate his wife, had the right to divorce her, so that nothing worse would happen. For the Jews, being inclined to murder and bloodthirsty, did not spare their closest relatives, so that they even slaughtered their own sons and daughters as sacrifices to demons. But this is a deficiency and imperfection of the Law. That was the time for such legislation, but now a different, more perfect teaching is needed. Therefore I say: whoever divorces his wife except for adultery and marries another commits adultery. Therefore there is nothing surprising if I teach about non-possessiveness, even though the Law says nothing clearly about it. Behold, the Law indifferently gave a commandment about marital divorce, to prevent murder among the Jews; but I, training My listeners toward the highest perfection, forbid divorce without a justifiable reason, and I command this not in opposition to the Law, but so that there would be no murders between husbands and wives. And I confirm this when I teach that spouses should care for one another and cherish each other as their own members. The Law also desired this, but since the listeners were imperfect, it ordained the dissolution of marriage so that, at least under such a condition, husband and wife would spare each other and not rage against one another.
So, Christ confirmed all the requirements of the Law; and therefore He said well that it is impossible for one tittle of the Law to perish. For how could it have perished, when Christ fulfilled it (the Law) in a better form?
Lk. 16:19. A certain man was rich, and was clothed in purple and fine linen, and feasted sumptuously every day.
This discourse stands in connection with the previous one. Since above the Lord taught how to manage wealth well, He rightly appends this parable also, which through the example of what happened to the rich man points to the very same idea. This discourse is precisely a parable, and not an actual event, as some have thought without foundation. For the time has not yet come for the righteous to inherit blessings, nor for sinners to inherit the opposite. And the Lord gave the discourse a figurative form, so as both to bring the unmerciful to their senses about what awaits them in the future, and to teach those who suffer hardship that they will be blessed for what they endure here. The rich man in the parable the Lord introduced without a name, since he is not worthy even to be named before God, as it is also said through the Prophet: "I will not make mention of their names with my lips" (Ps. 16:4).
Lk. 16:20. There was also a certain beggar, named Lazarus, who lay at his gate, covered with sores.
And He mentions the poor man by name, for the names of the righteous are written in the book of life. It is said, according to the tradition of the Hebrews, that at that time there was in Jerusalem a certain Lazarus who was in extreme poverty and sickness, and that the Lord mentioned him, taking him into the parable as someone manifest and well-known.
The rich man was in every respect prosperous. He was clothed in purple and fine linen, and not only was he clothed, but he also enjoyed every other pleasure. "He feasted sumptuously," it says, and not that today yes, but tomorrow no, but "every day," and not moderately, but "sumptuously," that is, lavishly and extravagantly. But Lazarus was poor and sick, and moreover "covered with sores," as it says. For one can be sick and yet not be covered in wounds, but from these the suffering is increased. And he was laid at the gate of the rich man.
Lk. 16:21. And he desired to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table; and the dogs came and licked his sores.
A new sorrow was to see that others enjoyed abundance while he languished in hunger. For he desired to be filled not with luxurious foods, but with the crumbs from them—such as the dogs fed on. No one cared even to treat Lazarus's wounds, for the dogs licked his sores, since no one drove them away.
Lk. 16:22. The poor man died and was carried by the Angels to Abraham's bosom.
What then? Did Lazarus, being in such a wretched condition, blaspheme God, revile the luxurious life of the rich man? Did he condemn his inhumanity? Did he murmur against Providence? No, he thought nothing of the sort, but endured everything with great wisdom. How do we know this? From the fact that when he died, Angels received him. For if he had been a murmurer and a blasphemer, he would not have been deemed worthy of such an honor — being escorted and carried by Angels.
Lk. 16:22. The rich man also died, and they buried him.
Even during the rich man's lifetime his soul was truly buried; it wore the flesh as if it were a coffin. Therefore after his death he is not led up by Angels, but is brought down to Hades. For he who never thought of anything lofty or heavenly is worthy of the lowest place. By the words "they buried him" the Lord hinted that his soul received as its lot a place in the netherworld, a place of darkness.
Lk. 16:23. And in Hades, being in torments, he lifted up his eyes and saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.
Just as the Lord, having cast Adam out of paradise, settled him before paradise (Gen. 3:24), so that the suffering, repeated by the constant sight of paradise, would give Adam a clearer sense of his loss of blessedness, so also He condemned this rich man before the face of Lazarus, so that seeing in what state Lazarus now was, the rich man would feel what he had been deprived of through his inhumanity. But why did the rich man see Lazarus not with some other righteous person, but in the bosom of Abraham? Since Abraham was hospitable, and the rich man needed to be convicted of his lack of love for hospitality, therefore the rich man sees Lazarus with Abraham. For Abraham invited even those passing by into his home, while this man despised even the one lying inside his home.
Lk. 16:24. And he cried out and said: Father Abraham! Have mercy on me and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame.
Why does the rich man address his request not to Lazarus, but to Abraham? Perhaps he was ashamed, or perhaps he thought that Lazarus remembered his evil, and judged Lazarus by his own deeds. If I (he might have thought), enjoying such happiness, despised him while he was oppressed by such misfortune, and did not give him even crumbs, then all the more will he, whom I despised, remember the evil and not agree to show me mercy. This is why he addresses his words to Abraham, thinking, probably, that the patriarch did not know how things had been. And what does Abraham say?
Lk. 16:25. But Abraham said: Child!