LUKE ON MANAGEMENT:
A 1ST CENTURY ANALYSIS
FOR A 21ST CENTURY AUDIENCE*
Bruno Dyck
Thursday, June 30, 2011
CBFA Conference – Mt. Vernon, Ohio
*This research has been funded by
Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
1
Overview of Presentation
 1. Proposing an alternative to the status quo
How a 1st century understanding of management “lens” leads
to alternative interpretations of key Lukan mgt passages
 2. Testing the new alternative in practice
A comprehensive analysis of Luke through the lens of a 1st
century understanding of management
 3. A new way of seeing
Examining other key themes in Luke and noting their
implications for management (KOG, salvation, Holy Spirit)
 4. Re-inventing social institutions
Developing hallmarks of organizational systems and structure
that are consistent with Luke on management
 Implications/Discussion
1. Proposing an alternative to status quo
Thanks to Max Weber, many people consider modern
management theory to be based on a JudeoChristian (Protestant) ethic.
However, Weber and others have suggested that
reading the biblical narrative via a 1st century lens
may give rise to a very different approach to
management.
This section will briefly describe how management
was understood in 1st century Palestine, and then
use this to interpret two Lukan passages that are
particularly relevant for management:
1. Parable of the Shrewd Manager
2. Parable of the Ten Pounds (cf Parable of Talents, Matt)
Two key dimensions of mgmt in 1st century
1. Managing the oikos (=‘household’) (>100 allusions in Luke)
- oikos > family (no word for ‘family’); incl. slaves
- oikos = goods & services producing orgs of time
- oikonomia = household mgt (economics)
- but today economics = “unnatural chrematistics”
- Aristotle warned against “acquisitive economics”
2. Managing patron-client relationships (>200 allusions in Luke)
- patron-client relationships were the “glue” that
held the different households (oikos) together
- it was the duty of patrons to keep clients indebted
- mgt important in patron-client interface
Context of Mgmt in 1st century
 Increasing taxation  increasing oppression and land
fore-closures among poor  increasing size of estates
and increasing number of absentee landlords 
increasing numbers of ‘non-owner’ mgrs (8% of population)
 Increasing emphasis among both the Roman and
Jewish elite on conspicuous consumption (trade) and
‘acquisitive economics’ (using money to make money);
this became agenda of managers (‘beneath’ owners)
 In 1st-century the economy was thought to be zerosum (e.g., no thought of ‘growing’ an economy, so to
get richer someone else needed to get poorer – 10% of
population dispossessed “outcasts” who did not
belong to an oikos nor enjoy its security)
Using a 1st century mgmt lens to interpret
the Parable of Shrewd Manager (Lk 16: 1-8)
 Despite this parable having 5 of the 8 mentions of
“manager” in all 4 gospels, it is virtually ignored (e.g.,
never cited among 1500 passages in 1st decade of JBIB)
 This parable rarely cited in literature because it seems to
undermine 21st century mgt norms when it commends
a manager who unilaterally scatters (wastes?) his rich
employer’s financial resources
 Of course, for Jesus’ listeners in the 1st century this
praise is entirely understandable -- the parable simply
teaches that managers should play a positive role in
decreasing the gap between rich and poor.
Using a 1st century mgmt lens to interpret
the Parable of the Ten Pounds (Lk 19:11-27; cf
Matt)
 This parable has become a poster-child of the
literature integrating Bible and management.
 A typical contemporary interpretation suggests that
managers who multiply their master’s (presumed to be
God) wealth are praiseworthy, and that managers who
fail to do so are to be punished.
 In contrast, a 1st century interpretation suggests that
the master in the parable is an exploitive boss who
reaps where he does not sow (i.e., he is not God) who
rewards managers for widening the gap between the
rich and the poor. The real “hero” in the parable is
the manager who refuses to be bullied into doing so.
Implications thus far
 These alternative 1st century interpretations of the parables do
not seem to be consistent with approach to management
associated with Weber’s understanding of the Protestant ethic
 In particular, this ‘1st century interpretation’ of these 2 parables
suggests managers are NOT called to maximize their
employer’s financial resources, but rather to use them shrewdly
in ways that benefit the larger community (e.g., serve the poor)
 Put differently, if these alternative interpretations are correct,
they would give rise to an approach to management very
different from the status quo.
 However, before we begin to develop this alternative approach
to management, it is worth examining what the rest of Gospel
says about management using our 1st century lens (i.e., are these
alternative interpretations consistent with the rest of Luke?)
 This is the task to which we now turn
2. Testing the new alternative in
practice:
A comprehensive analysis of Luke
through the lens of a 1st century understanding of
management
This section looks at all passages in Luke that refer to:
A) the four 1st century dimensions of oikonomia, and
B) patron-client relationships
A. A closer look at passages about managing the oikos
Ever since Aristotle, ancient authors have agreed
that there are four components to oikonomia:
i) husband-wife relations
ii) parent-child relations
iii) master-slave relations
iv) money management (chrematistics)
i) Luke on husband-wife relationships
Luke mentions only 4 married couples by name, and
in each the wife seems to enjoy particular influence:
- Mary and Joseph (Jesus’ parents), where Mary gets more
attention from God and angels than Joseph;
- Elisabeth and Zechariah (John the Baptist parents) where
Elisabeth names John (after Zechariah loses his voice);
- Herodias and Philip, where Herodias asks for John’s death;
- Joanna and Chuza, where Joanna is Jesus’ follower.
In addition, Luke mentions 7 widows, who are always
portrayed in positive light.
Implications for management: In stark contrast to
1st century norms, Luke emphasizes that women are
not in any way subordinate or subservient to men:
they are equals.
ii) Luke on parent-child relationships
 Luke makes 188 references to parent-child pronouns, and has
9 passages that describe on-going relationship between a
parent and a (non-infant) child. Most passages challenge
traditional oikos:
– “From now on five in one household will be divided, three against two
and two against three; they will be divided: father against son and son
against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother,
mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against
mother-in-law.” (Luke 12:51-53)
– “Whoever comes to me and does not hate [that is, disavows their
primary allegiances to their] father and mother, wife and children,
brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple.”
(Luke 14:26
 Implications for mgmt: In stark contrast to 1st century norms
(esp. Roman norms), members of households are encouraged
to dismantle their traditional oikos relationships in order to
develop more inclusive (alternative) org structures & systems.
iii) Luke on master-slave relationships
About a dozen passages in Luke refer to slaves, where
they are regularly described in positive ways
(e.g., Jesus’ mother describes herself as a favourably-lookedupon slave of God, as does Simeon; Jesus heals the
centurion’s slave, a master returns from a wedding banquet
and becomes like a slave as he serves his household slaves,
Jesus himself models this when he washes his disciples feet).
In one passage Jesus likens his disciples to slaves who
embrace “sustenance economics” and shun
“acquisitive economics” (Lk 17:7-10).
Implications for management. In contrast to 1st
century norms, in Luke slaves are fully moral beings
and are presented as a model of ‘servant leadership.’
iv) Luke on managing finances
(chrematistics)
Luke has 18 passages that make reference to money:
- in the 9 passages that do not use the word “rich,”
money is presented as a normal part of everyday life (e.g.,
the Samaritan pays innkeeper, women provide resources Jesus).
- in the 9 passages do use the word “rich,” the rich are
criticized and called to share their wealth with the poor
- 1) the Mighty One “sent the rich away empty” (Lk 1:53)
- 2) “woe to you who are rich” (Lk 6:24)
- 3) “they are choked by their cares and riches” (Lk 8:14)
- 4) “Sell your possessions” (Lk 12:33)
- 5) “give up all your possessions” (Lk 14:33)
- 6) rich man praises shrewd manager for scattering his wealth (Lk 16)
- 7) “Sell all that you own” (Lk 18:22)
- 8) Zacchaeus gives ½ to poor, repays fraud 4x (Lk 19)
- 9) “rich people” give less than widow (Lk 21:1)
- Management implications. Money is a normal part
of organized life, and managers should seek to reduce
gap between rich and poor.
B. Luke on patron-client relationships
- 241 verses allude to ‘benefaction’; 4 passages
describe patron-client relationships at length
(e.g., don’t lord it over others, but rather serve them as a slave)
-Taken together, these passages seek to
undermine institutions that perpetuate the elite
and demean the poor. In particular, Luke
opposes actions designed to make recipients
subservient to benefactors, and rather Luke
promotes acts of genuine benefaction that benefit
others.
-“And forgive us our sins, for we ourselves
forgive everyone indebted to us” (Lk 11:4)
Summary of comprehensive analysis of
Luke on oikonomia & patron-client
relations
Luke often and consistently challenges conventional
management thinking from the 1st (and 21st) century:
i. Husband-wife: Men and women are equals
ii. Parent-child: Reinvent oikos; leave security of childhood oikos
in order to start a new more inclusive kind of oikos
iii. Master/slave: treat slaves with dignity; slaves as role model
(leadership is about serving others, not lording it over them)
iv. Money management (chrematistics): decrease gap between rich
and poor; reject acquisitive economics (“unnatural
chrematistics”); “you cannot serve both God and mammon”
v. Patron-client relationships: Benefaction should serve recipients,
and not indebt them to benefactors.
3. A new way of seeing
Now that we have tested and found consistent support
for the idea that Luke supports an “alternative”
approach to mgt, the next step is to examine whether
and how this alternative view is integrated with and
provides a new way of seeing the larger, more
comprehensive message of Luke.
We will use this “1st century management lens” to look
at 3 key themes that Luke is known for
(a) kingdom of God (KOG),
(b) salvation, and
(c) the Holy Spirit.
a. Kingdom of God (KOG)
- Jesus teaches about the KOG more often than any other
topic (Luke has 31 mentions, in 21 main passages)
- KOG does not refer to geographic place; rather it refers
to ‘reign’ of God (in modern terms, ‘mgmt style’ of God)
- While today KOG often connotes spiritual after-life, in
1st century KOG language was very here-and-now
- E.g., each Roman coin had engraving of Emperor and ‘Son of God’
we are to pray: “Thy kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven”).
- In 1st century everything was view holistically: people did
not differentiate between the religious sphere and the
political or oikos spheres of life
Luke’s 21 KOG passages fall into 4 thematic “types”
Theme #1: Passages that proclaim core KOG
attributes to crowds (4 passages -- implicitly promoting
a counter-cultural alternative to 1st-century Pax Romana )
Theme #2: Passages that describe how KOG ideas are
learned by disciples (5 passages)
Theme #3: Passages that describe how KOG ideas are
enacted by followers (4 passages)
Theme #4: Passages that describe KOG outcomes
(8)
Note that an oikos is prominent in 10 of the 12 passages
where the KOG is enacted or manifest (but only in 2
of 8 passages in first two types).
Implications for management: The oikos (and thus
KOG is counter-cultural (subversive)
Only once does Jesus say: ‘The KOG is like …
… a mustard seed (a weed) that a gardener took and
deliberately sowed in the garden where it grew & became a
tree, and the birds of the air made their nests in its branches
(creation care lowers productivity of vegetable garden).
… yeast (counter-cultural, holy bread is unleavened) that a woman
took and mixed in with 3 measures of flour (13.3 litres) until
all of it was leavened. (Lk13:18-19)
Implications for management: KOG is evident in countercultural activities in oikos settings
b. Salvation (before being limited to spiritual realm)
NB idea in 1st century (eg Emperor=Savior); had 2 dimensions:
-i) Saved from oppressive structures & systems (Jewish emph.)
-ii) Bestowal of blessings/life-giving strx & syst (Greco-Roman)
Two word forms of salvation in Luke:
1. 7 of Luke’s 8 references to the noun form of salvation
(salvation, savior) occur prior to Jesus’ baptism (Lk 3:21),
and in each case it refers to a group of people receiving
salvation (e.g., house of David, Gentiles, all people);
2. All 17 subsequent references use the verb form, usually
referring to an individual being saved (e.g., healed, restored
to community, saved from oppressive structures)
Jesus only once uses the term ‘salvation’
Luke 19:1-10 describes how Jesus visits the oikos of a rich
tax collector named Zacchaeus, who says:
“Look, half of my possessions, Lord, I will give to the
poor; and if I have defrauded anyone of anything, I will
pay back four times as much.”
Then Jesus said to Zacchaeus: “Today salvation
[noun]has come to this oikos” [Jesus does not use the
phrase “your faith has saved you” used 4 times
previously]
Implications for mgt: In Luke, Jesus saves [verb]
individuals from oppressive structures and systems, but
salvation [noun] comes via implementing redemptive/lifegiving structures & systems. This clearly places managers
c. Holy Spirit
Luke’s 16 references to Holy Spirit > other 3 gospels combined
Holy Spirit not confined to a spiritual realm (very practical)
- Holy Spirit is closely linked to salvation and to KOG
- HS at core of Jesus’ work (and thus that of his followers):
“The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to
bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the
captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to
proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor” (Luke 4:18-19).
- baptism of HS is key part of Jesus’ ministry in Luke/Acts
Implication for management: The Holy Spirit is essential to
sustained KOG management
Summary, new way of seeing big picture
 Rather than see KOG as referring primarily to a heavenly
after-life, this analysis of Luke suggests that the KOG is
grounded in this world and typically enacted and manifest
in an oikos setting (thus very relevant for mgt)
 Rather than see salvation as referring primarily to
forgiveness of sins for an eternity in heaven, this analysis
of Luke suggests that salvation occurs when oppressive
structures and systems are replaced with new ‘redeemed’
structures and systems, especially in oikos setting (again
pointing to a key role for management)
 Rather than limiting the Holy Spirit primarily to a
spiritual realm, this analysis suggests that the HS is key in
empowering managers to enact KOG and to implement
oikos structures and systems that facilitate salvation
4. Re-inventing social institutions
As we have seen, a 1st-century management lens shows
that Luke has a lot to say about management.
It turns out Luke also provides advice on how to change
social institutions accordingly.
Luke points to a key four-phase community discernment
process associated with KOG mgmt:
1. Identify issue to address (eg to challenge oppressive activity)
2. Experiment with new way of doing things (emancipation)
3. Develop a new way of seeing the big picture (worldview)
4. Reinvent social institutions (larger-scale)
These 4 phases resemble modern triple-loop learning theory, where
problems are resolved via changed: (i) actions, (ii) values and (iii)
institutions
Hey, I’ve never seen such a 4-phase
process explicitly spelled out in Luke!
- You’re right, this 4-phase model is not self-evident in a
Western linear way of reading the text
- but neither is the highly-influential 4-phase ‘Socratic method’ drawn from
Socrates’ dialogues, perhaps his most important contribution to philosophy.
- Rather, the 4-phase model is embedded in the chiastic
structure of Luke’s ‘Journey Narrative’ (from Lk 9:51 to 19:40).
This JN is problematic for scholars because they agree
(a) it is a single narrative text (describing Jesus’ journey to
Jerusalem) but (b) it does not describe a geographic
journey, and (c) it defies being interpreted linearly.
- Unfortunately we lack time to go into detail on chiasms
& the rigor I followed to develop the model (incl. several
experiments with 30 readers to confirm various phases)
Journey Narrative (Lk 9:51-19:40)
 Contains 80% of Luke’s mentions of words related to
mgmt, financial wealth, & social justice.
 JN proceeds through the four-phase process model six
times (three times forward, three times in reverse).
 JN places emphasis on reinventing social institutions
(e.g., each passage related to the 4th phase in the model
starts with Jesus addressing a member of the social
elite/leadership)
Example of how the 4-phase model unfolds
CYCLE 1: Managing relationships with outsiders
(people from competing oikos) (Lk 9:51-10:37)
Phase 1 (issue to address): Hostility toward outsiders (Lk 9: 51-56)
- In this passage Jesus points to the problematic nature of the ongoing animosity between the Jews and their neighboring Samaritans
- When Jesus first sets his face to journey to Jerusalem, messengers
whom he had sent to prepare his way are rebuffed by a Samaritan
village. James and John ask Jesus if he wants them to “command
fire to come down from heaven and consume” the Samaritan village.
Jesus rebukes his disciples: this is no way to treat people from
another oikos.
Example of 4-phase model, continued
Phase 2 (actions to resolve issue): Spend time with
outsiders, on their turf (Lk 9:57-10:20)
Jesus instructs and sends 70 of his followers in groups of
two to visit Samaritan villages, to offer peace to their
oikos, to heal the sick and say KOG is near to them
Jesus tells the disciples NOT to bring any money, but to
have the Samaritans provide lodging and food, thereby
ensuring that Jesus followers become as “clients” to
their Samaritan hosts/“benefactors”
Jesus spends 6 verses describing contingency plans
depending on how villagers respond to his followers
Upon their return the 70 describe their experiences; the
experiment is a big success.
Example of 4-phase model, continued
Phase 3 (new way of seeing): Adopt a new worldview
(Lk 10:21-24)
Experiencing this new way of relating to Samaritans (e.g.,
accepting their hospitality and promoting peace)
illustrates how existing dysfunctional traditions (which
might serve the interests of the elite) can be exposed by
experiments that defy them, which in turn prompts new
ways of seeing the big picture (e.g., Jesus describes how
things that had been hidden from the apparent “wise
and the intelligent” are revealed to “infants”).
Jesus tells his disciples: “Blessed are the eyes that see
what you see! For I tell you that many prophets and
kings desired to see what you see, but did not see it,
and to hear what you hear, but did not hear it” (Lk 10: 23-24)
Example of 4-phase model, continued
Phase 4 (reinvent institutions): Leaders should show
neighborly love = the Good Samaritan (Lk 10: 25-37)
Jesus explains to a lawyer what loving your neighbor means.
In particular Jesus tells the parable of the Good Samaritan:
- a man is ambushed and left for dead on the road
- a priest arrives, sees him, and walks by on the other side (fear
of robbers? fear of impurity according to law?)
- ditto a Levite (another social elite, religious leader)
- however a Samaritan (a layperson & travelling merchant)
arrives, is moved with pity, and cares for the man and brings
him to an inn and pays the innkeeper to help
The lesson? Overcome negative traditions; transform norms
that inhibit helping the needy.
Summary of reinventing social institutions
This 4-phase process (which repeats itself 6 times in JN
and in Acts) points to the importance in Luke of:
1. Challenging the status quo (especially rebuking
members in one’s inner circle);
2. Designing and carrying out “experiments” that offer
emancipation from oppressive structures (though these
experiments should never be cast in stone, lest they
become institutionalized over time);
3. Investing time/effort required recast one’s worldview;
4. Reinventing social institutions: Luke has a deep and
abiding interest in reshaping social institutions—oikos
and beyond—in a way that is (a) invitational rather than
coercive, and (b) tentative rather than permanent.
Summary
Luke has much to say about management (e.g., >100
allusions to oikos, >200 to patron-client relations)
The approach to management promoted in Luke differs
from the dominant views in 1st century Palestine:
1. According to Luke, oikos structures & systems should be
designed holistically to include marginalized people; they
should promote sustenance economics rather than
acquisitive economics;
2. According to Luke, benefaction should serve to help the
needy in ways that treat them as moral equals; not in ways
that make them indebted (Roman), nor be offered only to
socio-economic equals (classic Greek);
3. The 4-phase process model points to new (emancipatory)
institutions, & to avoiding (static) institutionalization.
Implications for 21st century mgt theory/practice
1. What if the primary goal of business mgt was to help the
marginalized, rather than to maximize profits?
- what if we emphasized the bottom-rung instead of the bottomline?
- does this demand a ‘theological turn’ to makes altruism possible?
2. What if other stakeholders (customers, employees, suppliers,
competitors, neighbors, future generations) were treated as
equals, rather than as groups to “lord it over”?
- eg, what if Porter’s “5 competitive forces” were conceived as
“5 levers to foster community” rather than as dimensions where
organizations seek to have relative power over others?
3. What if management theory was more humble, more
process-oriented?
- eg, what might happen to leadership theory? Decision-making?