A Parable We Love to Hate Matthew 20:1 - 16

I have found that, sometimes, the hardest medicine to take, theologically, is an occasion when a saying or parable of Jesus can cause some embarrassment when telling it to another. Such is the case with the parable of the landowner and workers found in Matthew's gospel. I cannot count the times when students, and others, have reacted to the story with cries of "That's not fair" and "those guys got a raw deal." Indeed, if we read the story with our everyday eyes, we will be left unsatisfied, with a lingering discomfort. And, God forbid, that anything in scripture should make American Christians uncomfortable. I wonder if a survey would show that the most popular churches today are those where the uncomfortable side of Christian discipleship is emphasized? I wouldn't count on that. Matthew's parable flies in the face of every value we are taught about the rewards of hard work and honesty. Should those who worked for just one hour receive the same wage as those who worked for twelve hours? Well, look at the deal the landowner made with each worker: a day's wage for work completed. So, did he lie to anyone? No, he offered exactly what he had promised. So, then, why all of the grumbling? Perhaps because of one human trait that has not changed in the course of two thousand years: we love extra credit for working hard. We expect it from our employers, and my students expect it from me. The men who worked twelve hours had agreed to do so for a day's wage, an amount of money that would enable them to survive for a day. When they saw that the last hired were given that wage, they imagined that they were due some extra incentive, because they had worked  a full day, not just one hour. I have read a commentary, or two, that accuse the landowner of being a sadistic power-hungry cretin who liked nothing better than to remind the populace of his superiority. Really? Come on now. First, we must remember that this story is a parable, not an historical account of a true event. And second, Jesus was trying to convey an important message: God's order is not always consistent with our order. What is the real point of this story? In the words of William Loader, of the Uniting Church in Australia, "The story opens new vistas. The employer kept the contract he had made with the first hired but also gave the last hired what they needed to live. The last hired received their denarius, their living. Viewed from this perspective the practice comes close to what for us is a norm: unemployment benefit, making sure people have enough to live on. A different standard is applied: need, not earning rights. To view it in this way puts many things in a new perspective. It does not smooth out all the rough edges, but it is enough to open the door to a different way of thinking." In other words, the landowner gave the workers what they needed, not necessarily what the wanted or thought they deserved. Imagine the effect on the silly season of American politics if those running for public office were to promise the populace to find ways to procure for them what they need, not what they want. And does it strike anyone else as in-congruent that, those candidates who claim to have the strongest Christian credentials are the very people who resent "entitlements?" The parable cuts through such nonsense and teaches a lesson about giving people not what they deserve, but what they need. A parable we love to hate? Very likely. A parable we desperately need to hear in this politically and theologically shallow time in which we live? For certain.