Matthew 22:1-14

 

Matthew 22:1-14 (NRSV)

Once more Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying: ² “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. ³ He sent his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet, but they would not come. ⁴ Again he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited: Look, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready; come to the wedding banquet.’ ⁵ But they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, ⁶ while the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them. ⁷ The king was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. ⁸ Then he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. ⁹ Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.’ ¹⁰ Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad; so the wedding hall was filled with guests.

¹¹ “But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe, ¹² and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding robe?’ And he was speechless. ¹³ Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ ¹⁴ For many are called, but few are chosen.”

 

Matthew 22:1-14 is a parable of the wedding feast. Jesus was apparently fond of weddings. I leave it to you to look up the times when Jesus mentions wedding and is present at weddings. 

The source is material Matthew has in common with Luke 14:15-24. Most scholars think the wording in Luke is the closest to what Jesus said. However, I will discuss these verses in three sections as I think Matthew intended us to hear them.

First, in verses 1-10, does a parable disclose or disguise. If you consider many of the parables of Jesus and their puzzling nature, one legitimately wonders. ¹Once more Jesus spoke to them in parables, a phrase found here and in Mark 3:23.  Saying: ² “The kingdom of heaven (βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν, “the heavens”), a term the other gospels do not use the term even once. Matthew also uses other "kingdom"-expressions, such as simply "the kingdom," when the meaning is clear (e.g., 4:23; 9:35; 13:19), "his kingdom" (referring to God's kingdom, 6:33, or the kingdom of the Son of Man, 13:41; 16:28), and "kingdom of the Father" (6:10; 13:43; 26:29). While the other gospels will use “kingdom of God” often, Matthew uses only four times, in 12:28, 19:24, 21:31, and 21:43. Given that Matthew is the one source that uses both kingdom of God and kingdom of the heavens, Scholars have noted and carefully analyzed the distinction for generations. Some scholars will suggest that Matthew has a distinction. “Kingdom of heaven” refers to the community founded by and centered on Jesus, in other words, he is thinking of the church. “Kingdom of God” would then refer to would refer to the eschatological realm inaugurated at the end of human history. If that distinction is accurate, then we need to listen to this parable in Matthew as speaking to the matter of the faithful community on earth. It would nonetheless be unwise and incorrect to draw a sharp distinction between the two kingdoms, as both are concerned with ultimate questions of existence, meaning and purpose. Both are concerned with the nature, identity and purpose of Jesus Christ, and there is much overlap in membership. Perhaps the most crucial distinction between them, however, is that the kingdom of heaven, being inaugurated, populated and continued on earth, is penultimate in its membership and existence. The kingdom of the heavens may be compared to a king (God) who gave a wedding banquet for his son. ³ He sent his slaves (the prophets) a first time to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet (Israel), but they would not come. The parable exhibits outrageous situations typical of the parables of Jesus. All parties refuse the invitation of the host. ⁴ Again a second time he sent other slaves, saying, ‘Tell those who have been invited (Israel): Look, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready; come to the wedding banquet.’ In the context of the ministry of Jesus, God issues the invitation to the feast through the ministry of Jesus.[1] Typical of the parables of Jesus, we have an exaggeration in that not one of those originally invited would come. Imagine today if a very wealthy parent threw a massively expensive wedding, made it known in the media, invited a thousand people to come, and not one person would come. Such a story would not happen in real life, but it can happen in a parable if the teller of the story wants to emphasize the point of the extent and depth of the rejection. The king (God) sends even more slaves (or prophets) to stress that everything is ready for them to come to the wedding banquet. I would like to pause and consider the nature of the evangelical message today. The evangelical ministry of the church today is a matter of inviting people to a feast.[2] The evangelical ministry of the community occurs in the context of the victory of Jesus in the resurrection and ascension that signals the future reconciliation and redemption of the world. For that reason, the feast is ready.[3] On the side of God, everything is ready for people to participate in the wedding banquet.[4] Such an invitation suggests an invitation to joy and a glorious offer of grace (Eduard Schweizer). Thus, one lesson in this parable is that followers of Jesus are inviting others to join them in the feast or festival. You want your friends at the wedding. You are excited when they can be present. ⁵ But they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, those originally invited have superficial reasons for not coming to the banquet. For Matthew, any failure to accept the invitation is superficial when compared to the banquet. Even so, their intent is to come later. The story suggests that the moment of decision is now (Eduard Schweizer). The invitation should take precedence over everything else. ⁶ While the rest seized his slaves, mistreated them, and killed them (prophets). The tradition of martyrdom of the prophets of Israel and the earliest apostles appears We can see a similar theme in Matthew 10:16-23, 21:35-46, and 23:29-39. For Matthew, we have an illustration here of Israel rejecting Jesus. ⁷ The king God) was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city (Jerusalem). Matthew, writing after the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, may have worded this part of the parable in light of that event. I should stress that when the banquet is ready, those originally invited have rejected the invitation. ⁸ Then a third time, the tripling of the invitation a feature of oral transmission, he said to his slaves, ‘The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. ⁹ Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.’ In another example of the outrageous situation described in the parable, the king must issue invitations to people in the streets in order to fill the house. ¹⁰ Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad; so, unexpectedly, the wedding hall was filled with guests. The parable would mean an invitation to joy, an incomprehensible, glorious offer of grace in images as concrete as possible (Schweizer).  The nature of this invitation shows a basic respect for all human beings.[5] The parable might even be an allusion to the disputed table fellowship of Jesus with tax collectors and sinners. It reminds us that the meals Jesus celebrated are anticipatory signs and depictions of the eschatological fellowship of the rule of God. Such meals or the central symbolic action of Jesus in which the message of the nearness of the rule of God and the salvation it offers finds expression.[6] Thus, one lesson this parable teaches us is that God has invited all people to the table. God invites us - the good and the bad and the in between - to be part of the people of God. God calls and invites us all. God has prepared the feast for all. Matthew may also be suggesting that a final judgment and final separation will come with the arrival of the kingdom of God. 

As Matthew presents the parable, it illustrates the rejection of Jesus by Israel, and at the same time warns the community against the same mistake. Further, at the very moment when the feast was ready, the Jews rejected it.  It is an allegory of the history of salvation: a king (God) prepares a feast for his son (Jesus) and invites his subjects (Israel) to the banquet.  They treat the invitations lightly or kill the king’s servants (the prophets, although may think of the disciples).  The king destroys them and their city (Jerusalem) and invites others (foreigners) to the feast.

You want your friends at the wedding. You are excited when they can be present. A wonderful hymn by Charles Wesley, published in 1747, relates to the theme of the parable. It speaks to the universality of the invitation, the needy condition of all who receive the invitation, the welcome they will find from Christ, the reception of the evangelical message as if God were speaking directly to the hearer, and that now is the moment to respond. I share just a few of the phrases of this long hymn that relate to the parable.

Come, sinners, to the Gospel feast;
Let every soul be Jesus’ guest.
Ye need not one be left behind,
For God hath bid all humankind.

 

Come, all ye souls by sin oppressed,
Ye restless wanderers after rest;
Ye poor, and maimed, and sick, and blind,
In Christ a hearty welcome find.

 

My message as from God receive;
Ye all may come to Christ and live.

 

This is the time, no more delay!
This is the Lord’s accepted day.
Come thou, this moment, at His call,

 

Verses 11-13 have an independent character in that they introduce other elements that are important to Matthew. We have an abrupt shift in emphasis. We move from the gracious gift of entry into the banquet that show respect to all, good and bad, to the selective and uncertain qualifications for entry. ¹¹ “But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe, ¹² and he said to him, ‘Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding robe?’ This guest's disdain for the king's dress code displayed a lack of appreciation for the party and love for the king. The larger point is that only the king himself did the bouncing. He determined who was in and out. He will determine who is wearing the righteousness of Christ. And he was speechless. ¹³ Then the king said to the attendants, ‘Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’ Thus, those allowed to enter the wedding banquet might not have the proper attire. The point could be that the individual in question is not ready to celebrate and join the festival. As such, the individual may well have kinship with the previous rejections of the invitation. The individual had declined the invitation in the sense that the individual is present unwillingly. Reluctant obedience to the invitation is not obedience.[7] Thus, another lesson from this parable is that while some people will officially reject the invitation and consider themselves outside the people of God, one can be just as rebellious and show up anyway. 

At this point, the concern is for present ecclesiology and future eschatology. 

One concern is for the practical matter of church discipline, or membership in the messianic community. Matthew confronted, as did the other evangelists, the problem of the expansion of the Jesus movement from primarily within Judaism to an increasingly wide Gentile mission, with people of differing backgrounds, customs, morals and beliefs beginning to mix vigorously in sometimes small communities. Matthew recognized that the standards demanded by the radical nature of the gospel would be unlikely in so heterogeneous a movement, and so purity of membership would be impossible in an earthly context (e.g., 18:23ff).

A second concern with a final judgment was to prevent precisely the same sort of religious complacency from infecting the early Christian communities that had so corrupted the Jewish communities from which they had arisen. Jesus warned his disciples repeatedly in Matthew's gospel to avoid the spiritual trap of thinking that election denoted immunity from judgment (e.g., 20:1-16; 21:33-41). The present passage is concerned especially with this threat. Among the evangelists, Matthew's emphasis on the judgment that awaits Christians and non-Christians alike ("weeping and gnashing of teeth" occurs almost entirely in Matthew; only once does it occur in Luke, at 13:28) has often posed a challenge to the widespread and early Christian understanding of God's salvation as a free gift (found especially in the writings of Paul).

At this point, however, I offer a word of caution. We tend to spend too much time in the church worrying about who is in and who is out. If proper presence in the community or in the rule of God requires a “bouncer,” so to speak, God is the bouncer. You and I must not put ourselves in that position. Our worry is not who is properly in or out when it comes to the present community of the people of God or the eschatological future of the rule of God. We bicker over who worships the right way, who dresses appropriately, whose theology is tightest and whose life is cleanest. The result is that such discussions end up robbing us of the simple joy of being invited. The parable wants to prevent religious complacency among the community of Matthew. The community is not immune from judgment, as we see in 20:1-16 and 21:33-41. The judgment awaits Christians and non-Christians alike. Our task is mostly to enjoy and invite. Others have put it like this: Found people find people. Invited people invite people. God sorts out the rest.

In verse 14, we have a saying, ¹⁴ For many are called, but few are chosen, continuing the warning against overconfidence upon the collective election of a people. We also find it in Jewish apocalyptic, such as IV Ezra 8:3.[8]

---

[1] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 285-6.

[2] Barth, Church Dogmatics IV.3 [72.4] 851.

[3] Barth, Church Dogmatics IV.3 [69.3] 246.

[4] Barth, Church Dogmatics IV.3 [71.1], 490.

[5] Barth, Church Dogmatics III.4 [55.1] 347.

[6] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 285-6.

[7] Barth, Church Dogmatics II.2 [37.3] 588.

[8] Pannenberg, Systematic Theology Volume 3, 439.