The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1896-05-16

popular ideas of that world are used
to give life and movement to the
parable. This is the only popularity
about thsi parable. Its imagery is
taken not from this world but from
the under world, as believed in both
by Greek and Hebrew. In other
respects it is just like all the other
parallels of the Saviour, and the same
rules of Interpretation are to be used
in it's elucidation. One OF these rules,
and one that is fundamental, is that a
parable is never drawn to establish
the truth of its own imagery.
The parable of the lost sheep, for
instance, was not drawn to prove
that there was man who had hum
dred sheep and lost one of them and
left the ninety and pine and went
after the lost one, etc. The absurdity
of the supposition is seen at once.
The truth of the imagery is not to be
proven from the parable. On the
other hand the presumption is that
the imagery is false; that the story is
manufactured for the occasion. Or
at least if there is any truth in it, it is
not so because it is used in the par
able. It's parabolical use does not in
any way sanction its truth. The pic
ture is drawn for another purpose
than to prove the truth of its own
imagery, and it is the business of the
interpreter to discover that purpose
and not proceed to interpret the pic
ture as though it was literal truth.
The truth is not in the picture but in
what the picture illustrates or repre-
sents, and not to recognize this rule in
the Interpretation of parallels is to go
wrong at the very outset. Now apply
this rule to the case in hand. The
rich man and Lazarus is a parable.
Its imagery is taken from the then
popular notions of the under world or
future life. But the imagery of
parable is false, therefore what it
tells us about that world or life is
false, acknowle dyed to be so by the
fact that it is used in the parable. 1t
is fable, not fact, used because it is
fable.
Or if this is thought to be too
strong, certain it is that its use in the
parable does not sanction its truth.
A parable never vouches for the truth
of its own imagery; therefore the par
able of the rich man and Lazarus
does not vouch for the truth of what
it says about the future life.
Therefore in the parable Christ
teaches absolutely nothing about
that life. The conditions of men in
the future he does not teach in the
parable. He does not teach and
he did not intend to teach how
men are treated. after death. He
no more teaches the conditions of
men in the under world than he
teaches the reality of that world
itself. He sanctions none of these
heather notions about the under
world, but the presumption is that
he regarded them all as false.
To attempt to make this parable,
therefore, teach anything concerning
the future is to violate the first prin-
ciple of parabolical Interpretation.
To make it teach some kind of refor-
nation in that life is just as much to
violate this principle as to make it
teach endless punishment, for it is
to make it teach the truth of it's own
imagery. 1t does not teach anything
concerning the future life; therefore,
it cannot teach repentance or refor
nation in that life. 1t must be I'M
derstood first of all that Dives and
Lazarus are fictitious characters, that
no such men ever lived and had such
experiences as are herein described;
that the whole thing is fiction and
not fact.
When one sees this clearly he is
ready to go on and interpret the
fiction, to find out and show forth
what the story means and he is not
ready to do this until he does see
this. So long as he fails to see that
there is no truth in the story itself;
he is not fit to interpret it. But see
ing this, seeing that there is no truth
in the story itself, that is, seeing
clearly what itdoes not teach, he may
go forward and find out what it does
teach. This parable teaches abso-
lutely nothing about the future life.
What, then, does it teach? We can
notanswer this question in this article
for space will not permit. We can
only say that generally speaking the
best Interpretation of all such pas
sages as this is to be found in the
Fathers of our Church. They studied
them more carefully and saw their
Al