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 center 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