Jesus and Zacchaeus: Breaking out of the "Box" II

Zacchaeus has four characteristics which work against him: he was a Jew, a "ruler" of sorts (he is a chief tax collector), a toll collector and wealthy. You would think that with this variety of negative attributes he wouldn't make a good showing in the New Hampshire primary, though I suppose if he had a "Live Free or Die" bumper sticker at his tax booth he might have been given a free pass. Jesus meets him as he passes through Jericho. We learned that Jesus was "drawing near" to Jericho in 18:35, and now he has reached it. Jericho, however, is somewhat 'out of the way' if you are on a journey from Galilee through Samaria to Jerusalem, but nevertheless it is the terminus of a highway from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea and thus it allows ready, if steep, access to Jerusalem to the West.

Luke takes care to identify Zacchaeus. Luke can be brusque when referring just to the "rich man" in an earlier story (16:19), but here he lingers on the description. The protagonist in the story has a name, and he is twice referred to by the intensive pronoun (autos--he himself). Such a pronoun is grammatically unnecessary; its presence serves as a hint to the reader to "slow down" and listen to the story. Zacchaeus is not simply a tax or toll collector; he is a "chief" (archi) tax collector. And, just so that we don't miss Luke's special twist--he is "rich." When we hear that last word in Luke's Gospel, we think of someone who is condemned ("Woe to you who are rich"--6:24), though if we leap to that conclusion at the end of verse 2, it is we who will be confused.

Like the blind man in 18:35-43, he sought to "see" Jesus. Then Luke drops in two Greek words that often are glossed over in English translations. Literally, the first part of v. 3 reads:

"And he was seeking to see Jesus--who he was--and he could not because of the crowd.."

Those words translated "who he was" are suggestive. They suggest that Zacchaeus not only wanted to "get a look" at Jesus, as we say, but that he wanted to figure out who Jesus really was--his essence, his person, his identity. He wasn't going to be satisfied with second-hand reports. He would go to the source and figure out for himself the truth of Jesus. So, he runs ahead to perch in a sycamore tree to get a good look at Jesus. We have a somewhat humorous picture of a little or young man scurrying along, with robes swishing, quickly climbing a tree so that he could catch more than just a glimpse of Jesus.

III. Jesus and Zacchaeus (v. 5)

Why does Jesus look up and notice Zacchaeus in the tree? Has he been informed about him and told his name? Or, is this an example of Jesus' perceptive abilities, such as in the story of the woman with the hemorrhage of blood? You recall that she touched the hem of Jesus' garment to be healed. Jesus didn't feel the touch, necessarily, but he felt "power go out from him." That is, Jesus was able to perceive deeper spiritual realities amid the hustle and bustle of life. Perhaps he was able to pick up these kind of spiritual "signals" from Zacchaeus as their eyes met. If that is what is happening, we can raise the question of whether this kind of discernment tool, so to speak, is available to us. Do you think so?

The humor, which I think exists in Zacchaeus' running to climb the tree, continues as the first think Jesus says to him is "come down from the tree." 'I just climbed the tree..and now you want me to come down?' Well, the humor quickly turns dead serious, and Jesus uses language typical of his discourse in this section of Luke (compare 13:33) to express his thought:

"Today, I must stay in your house."

Just as he must make it to Jerusalem, just as a prophet must perish in that holy city, so Jesus also must stay in Zacchaeus' house. Something of immense significance for the Gospel is happening in these words. I think it is the idea that Jesus wants to loosen the seemingly "fixed" categories spoken earlier in the Gospel. He wants to create a kind of ambiguity in his hearers because he realizes that life isn't simply the black and white of righteous and sinners. He has supped with tax collectors and sinners previously; he will do so again here, but this time salvation will be proclaimed (19:9).

IV. The Culmination of the Story (vv. 6-9)

The scene is one of great haste. Zacchaeus ran ahead of the procession. He clambered up the tree. Jesus told him to "make haste" and get down. So, in v. 6, he "hastily descended" from the tree. It has taken Jesus 10 chapters so far just to make it through Samaria, and now everyone is running. Now it all has to be done "today."

Jesus' presence causes the (by now) expected division in the house. Zacchaeus rejoices at the invitation but "all who saw," i.e., those standing around, began grumbling among themselves. Jesus, in their opinion, had the bad judgment to be hooked in by a "sinner." I think it is true that if you want to have a visible public persona it is hard not to be linked to certain "disreputable" people, causes or actions in order for those who oppose you to raise their standing. That supposed linkage doesn't seem to bother Jesus here, though in other instances he defends what he does.

Zacchaeus has a confession to make--he gives away 50% of all he has (not simply a tithe, or a tithe of specified items) to the poor. My, he must really be rich, because it would be difficult for many to give away 50% of their assets and still be solvent. Then, he adds that if he has "defrauded" anyone, he pays them fourfold. This is a curious statement. Why would he have done so? Perhaps because tax collecting in his day, like debt collection in our own day, often relies on individuals who threaten or take aggressive actions to hurt supposed debtors (like reporting them to the "Big Three" credit reporting agencies before even ascertaining whether a debt has been verified) before determining if a person is really indebted.

It is interesting to me that Jesus just seems to accept Zacchaeus' rather self-serving declaration at face value. He doesn't "check him out"; he doesn't ask to see Zacchaeus' personal finances; he doesn't interview acquaintances and opponents of Zacchaeus. We don't work like that today in our society. Even though you are "innocent until proven guilty," the presumption of guilt or liability often rests on people even when no demonstrable bad action has been done by those people. But Jesus simply accepts Zacchaeus' declaration. Or, alternatively, we might argue that Jesus ignores Zacchaeus' attempt at self-justification. We really don't know, that is, whether Zacchaeus' words were helpful for him or not. Maybe Jesus was just planning to proclaim Zacchaeus' salvation regardless of what he said. It would be like his decision to raise Lazarus from the dead regardless of what Mary and Martha said to him when they met him in grief (John 11:28ff.).

Conclusion

Jesus' message is that "today" salvation has come to Zacchaeus' house, because he is a true son of Abraham. In saying this, Jesus links his message with that of John the Baptist (3:8), who chastised people for proudly claiming their Abrahamic descent. Indeed, Jesus is the one who declares the true children of Abraham. And Zacchaeus will be among that number..when the Saints Come Marching In.

Adn so we leave this story not exactly confused, but not exactly with crystal clear understanding also. We now know that a rich person can enter the kingdom. But this rich person doesn't have to give up all that he has to do so. Is there a different Gospel for different people, a sort of "individual education plan" (i.e., "an IEP" is the document required under American law for those students in special education classes) Gospel? Maybe so. But you can't proclaim much of an ideology if everyone comes into the kingdom differently. And Luke seemed to have an ideology, or portray Jesus with a fairly sharp "ideological edge." Perhaps that isn't true. Perhaps that means we will just have to keep listening to Jesus.

2978