To read the texts click on the texts: Gen 37:3-4, 12-13, 17-28; Mt 21:33-43, 45-46
This
Parable is known variously as the parable of the wicked tenants or the Parable
of the Vineyard. While the parable in Mark has been allegorised, it is not
clear whether there was a non-allegorical parable going back to Jesus. Those
who are of the opinion that there was a non-allegorical parable interpret it to
mean that just as the tenants took radical action, so radical action is required
in order to gain the kingdom. Others see the parable to mean that the kingdom
will be taken away from Israel’s false leadership and given to gentiles and
sinners. Still others see the parable to mean that God does not abandon and
relentlessly seeks and searches for them and longs for a response from them.
In
Matthew, this parable is the centre of Jesus’ threefold parabolic response to
the chief priests and elders. The first of these is about the two sons
(21:28-32) and the third is about the great supper (22:1-14). He also links it
to the previous parable of the two sons by means of common words like vineyard,
son and the common theme of both which is doing God’s will rather than paying
lip service.
In
Matthew, the one who gives the vineyard to tenants is a “landowner” and not
simply a “man “as he is in Mark. This helps Matthew to use the term “Lord”
towards the end of the parable. The vineyard is described much like the one in
Isa 5:1-7 which indicates that Matthew intends the vineyard to be read as “Israel”
which it is in Isaiah. If in Mark the man who hired out the vineyard wants only
his share, here he wants all the fruit. This indicates that God’s claim on the
human person and all possessions it total and not partial. There are no half
measures with God. It is all or nothing. The two groups of servants which are
sent before the Son probably represent in Matthew the former and latter
prophets whom God sent to Israel to bring the nation back to him. It is only
after the two groups of servants are abused and murdered that the landowner
decides to send his Son. In Matthew the son is first taken out of the vineyard
and then killed (unlike in Mark where he is first killed and then thrown out of
the vineyard) to correspond with what actually happens at the passion and death
of Jesus (27:32). In Mark the question about the response of the owner of the
vineyard is asked and answered by Jesus, while in Matthew, Jesus asks the
questions and the Jewish leaders answer and through the answer pronounce their
own condemnation. The tenants had been unfaithful and will have to pay for this
unfaithfulness. The quotation of Ps 118:22-23 here results in increasing and
intensifying the condemnation of the tenants to whom what was given was given
in trust. Since they have been proved untrustworthy and unfaithful, they will
be denied further tenancy and others will be given the vineyard to tend.
The
Jewish leaders realize that the parable is about them and this only hardens
their stance against Jesus and strengthens their resolve to destroy him.
All
that we possess is given to us in trust. This means that while we may use what
we have, we have also to be concerned about those who do not have and be
generous with them. Selfishness on our part leads to our thinking that we must
use the things we have exclusively without even the thought of sharing them
with others.
No comments:
Post a Comment
You may use the "Anonymous" option to leave a comment if you do not possess a Google Account. But please leave your name and URL as www.errolsj.com