Matthew 20:1-16
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a
landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 After agreeing with the laborers for the usual
daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 When
he went out about nine o’clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace;
4 and he said to them, ‘You also
go into the vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ So they went. 5 When he went out again about noon and about three
o’clock, he did the same. 6 And
about five o’clock he went out and found others standing around; and he said to
them, ‘Why are you standing here idle all day?’ 7 They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’
He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard.’ 8 When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said
to his manager, ‘Call the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the
last and then going to the first.’ 9 When
those hired about five o’clock came, each of them received the usual daily wage.
10 Now when the first came, they
thought they would receive more; but each of them also received the usual daily
wage. 11 And when they received
it, they grumbled against the landowner, 12 saying,
‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have
borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ 13 But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am
doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? 14 Take what belongs to you and go; I choose to
give to this last the same as I give to you. 15 Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what
belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?’
<16 The last will be first and the first
last.>
Matthew 20:1-16 is a parable of
Jesus unique to Matthew in 20:1-15 and a saying of Jesus in 20:16.
Let us consider the parable first. One
often sees a title something like “parable of the workers in the vineyard.” One
might call this parable “The parable of the generous vineyard owner.” The
repetition of the owner’s activity and the play on words and themes are evidences
of oral transmission. The parable exaggerates the actions of the vineyard owner
as he goes into the marketplace repeatedly to hire workers for the harvest. The
owner begins at daybreak and continues to the eleventh hour of the twelve hour
work day in order to hire his workers. The normal workday was sunrise to
sunset, for obvious reasons. The fact that he does this suggests he is a
hands-on type of owner. He is also likely moderately well off, given the fact
that he goes himself to hire his day laborers. The hearers of the parable could
identify, since unemployment was part of Palestinian life. The first part of
the parable sets the stage in dramatic fashion. The denarius was the usual
daily wage. As the owner goes himself at 9, 3, and 5, he seems to stress that
the last hired had become idle, loitered, maybe even had become lazy. The second
half of the parable begins at verse 8. The owner decides to pay the last hired
first and he decides to give them the normal pay for a day’s work. That he does
so is the point of the parable. It cuts against the social and economic grain. Such
an act is surprising. As listeners, we know trouble is coming. It also reverses
expectations. It invites us to enter the world of the parable in order to ponder
what the rule of God is like if the story Jesus tells is true. The first hired
expected to receive the normal pay for the work they did for a day, and those
hired later expected to receive less. We as listeners expect the same. Yet,
when the owner in the world of the parable gives the last hired the same wage
as the first hired, we think something odd and strange happens. In particular,
those last hired would seem to have less concern for earning a living and
having a job. Yet, the owner is generous with them. Thus, we as readers and
listeners of the story feel some kinship with the first hired when they did not
receive more than they expected to receive. They complain, even taking the risk
of voicing their complaint to the owner. Yet, they do not seek to renegotiate
with the owner. Their complaint is that the owner has elevated the last hired
to the level of the first hired. The owner does so through payment of the daily
wage. Their complaint resists the generosity of the owner in favor of their
desire for the owner to be just and fair. The behavior of the owner invites us
to consider that maybe we need and in fact rely upon divine mercy in the rule
of God more so than divine justice and fairness. The nature of the complaint
points to the fact that the story concerns something more than economics, proper
business practice, and money. The complaint also reminds us that the work
itself in the vineyard of the owner is hard. The work is not for the faint of
heart in this vineyard. The complaint suggests the first hired elevate the
sacrifice they have made in comparison with the lack of such sacrifice the last
hired have made. Even today, the happiness of employees depends on those hiring
them valuing them and enhancing their sense of worth. Yes, the money is part of
that, but work surveys show that a sense of worth at work has more involved
than just the money. Their complaint is a reminder of the truth supposedly
spoken by Theodore Roosevelt, “Comparison is the thief of joy.” A further
surprise is that in the world of the parable, the owner actually responds to
the complaint. He does so by addressing one of those who complained as “friend.”
His response notes that he has been quite fair with the first hired, since he
paid them what he promised and what they expected. He grants that he has been
generous with the last hired. However, has someone passed a law against
generosity? The parable ends with the owner asking them whether envy has taken
over their attitudes simply because he is generous to all the workers in the
vineyard. The owner invites those who complain to consider whether they are
mean-spirited simply because the owner is generous. We as listeners and as
readers do not know whether those who complain will change their attitude. The more
important question the story raises is whether we will change our attitude. The
parable invites us to consider that the rule of God means that while the Father
gives good things to those who ask, the Father does so without regard to merit.[1] According
to New Testament scholar Craig Keener, Jewish teachers used a similar parable
to describe the day of divine judgment, but used it to make precisely the
opposite point that Jesus was making. Israel, who had worked hard and been
faithful for the long haul, would receive high wages while the Gentiles, who
had come in much later, would receive little.[2] The
parable is about grace. In the world of the parable, the wages are a sign of
grace. In the world Jesus lived, religious leaders had not been generous with
him. Yet, he offers the challenge to his listeners to consider divine goodness
and mercy. Such consideration should lead them to treat others differently than
they do. The parable is not an economic or business tract. One would not do
business in the real world this way. The owner of the vineyard is hardly
efficient. He would qualify as eccentric. He would not remain business long. However,
in the world of the rule of God, divine generosity works this way. The rule of
God contrasts to the world of business. At this point, one can make an
interesting parallel between the elder brother of Luke 15 and the grumbling
laborers of Matthew 20. Both begrudge the generosity of the father/vineyard
owner in his judgment and integrity. Both display pride and a demanding
attitude rather than humility. Both parables end with an open invitation to the
elder brother/first hired. This parable is a warning against grumbling over the
tax collectors and prostitutes being equal to the religious people. John Wesley, when someone kicked him out of
an English pulpit, once said, “There are few matters more repugnant to
reasonable people than the grace of God.”
Now, to mention briefly the saying
in verse 16, Matthew has quite appropriately placed the saying that the first
will be last and the last will be first in this setting. The parable hints at
the reversal of economic and social standing within the rule of God, even
though the main theme is divine grace.
One could
share many stories that show the offense human beings feel when they do not
think life has been fair. I share a moderately humorous story. An Anglican
priest who lived a godly life on earth was surprised when he got to heaven and
found himself shackled to a rather mean and ugly woman. To make matters worse he spotted a former
bishop chained to a woman who was charming and quite beautiful. He went straight to Saint Peter Saint Peter
Yes, “there
is wideness” in the mercy of God, as the hymn puts it, and “the love of God is
broader than the measure of the mind.”
[1] Pannenberg,
Systematic Theology Volume 1, 432.
[2] Keener, Craig. The IVP Bible Background Commentary:
New Testament. IVP Academic: 1994.
No comments:
Post a Comment