The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1896-06-20
RICH MAN AND LAZARUS AGAIN

In former article we emphasized
the point that the parable taught alb
solutely nothing concerning the flu
ture life. Being parable and its
imagery being taken from the
heather notions of the under world,
it can teach nothing concerning the
other world, for that would be to
make the parable prove the truth of
its own imagery, which a parable
never does.
To begin with, then, we must see
clearly that the story is false. There
was never any such rich man or poor
man and they never had any such
experiences as are herein recorded.
They are fictitious characters and all
their experiences are fictitious. 1t is
a fictitious story told to teach moral
lesson or to illustrate spiritual truth.
What we are to do, then, is to find out
what this lesson or truth is. When
we have done this we have learned
the moral significance of the parable.
Now, it is very clear that the rich
man is the hero of the story. He is
the chief character in it and it is his
fortunes that the story is drawn to
set forth. All else is subordinate to
this and all else is told to bring this
out. The rich man and his fortunes
are the heart of the story. Find out,
therefore, whom or what the rich man
represents and you have the key 10
the parable.
Now, it will not do to say that the
rich man is fictitious character but
that he represents the rich man in
the abstract or rich men in general.
For that would be to give no spiritual
significance to him or his riches and
we should be going around again in
the same old vicious circle of making
a parable affirm the truth of it's
own imagery. This particular rich
man cannot represent some other
rich man. The literal must have a
spiritual Specification. 1t is parable.
This man, therefore, who is rich in
this worlds goods, must represent
something or somebody who is rich
in some other sense, rich in some re-
ligious or spiritual sense. Who, then,
is this something or somebody whom
the rich man represents!
The answer is not far to seek. 1t
is found right in the context. The
rich man represents the Pharisees
with whom Jesus was contending
and concerning whom he was ut
tering these parallels. They were
the religious representatives of the
Hebrew people and hence were rich
in religious privileges. They inner
tied the wisdom of the old dispense
ton and were privileged to hear the
instructions of the new.
This accounts for the fact that no
sin is ascribed to the rich man. He
is rich man-that is all. The infer
ence is that he was charitable, for
Lazarus not only desired but ode
lighted" to be fed with the crumbs
which fell from the rich mans table.
The rich man, therefore, was not sinful
but merely rich. This because the
Saviour wished to represent in him
not the character but the religious
privileges of the Pharisees. He was
merely rich in this worlds goods;
they were rich merely in religious
privileges.
Having found now whom the rich
man represents, we may learn their
fortunes in his fortune. His exper-
fences represent the coming fate or
experiences of the Pharisees. He
"died and was buried" so the Phari-
sees were to die and be buried in re-
ligious darkness and oblivion at the
overthrow of their nation. They were
to die to their religious privileges,
and awake to find themselves cast out
of the kingdom and shut into the
"outer darkness"
After death the rich man finds him
self in torment, that is he finds him
self in Tartarus and sees Abraham
with Lazarus in Elysium, both of
which are in the under world or heath
en- hades. And now he begins con-
versation with Abraham. He desires
him to send Lazarus to cool his ton
que with drop of water. Abraham
replies that there is no intercourse
between them, that they are separat-
ed by great gulf that no one can
pass. Then the rich man pleads for
his brethren, and Abraham replies
that they have Moses and the proph-
cts and if they will not hear them,
they would not believe though one
rose from the dead.
All this represents the fortunes of