Grace to you and peace from God our Father and from our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. Amen. The text is the Gospel reading from Matthew 21.
Another parable; another story
about the reigning of Jesus. This one, however is different than most others in
two distinct ways. First, it’s a parable that is more about what is to come,
not what is happening or has been. Second, it’s a parable that does not end
well – not for the main character (the son) or for the tenants whom the son was
sent to work with. Thus, the parable is unsettling – for both reasons.
The parable is easy enough to
understand. Jesus calls them tenants. In the South, we would call them sharecroppers,
working the land and sharing the crop to pay the rent. Whether sharecroppers in
the south who refuse to share the crop, or tenants in ancient Israel who refuse
to pay the rent, there is another, simpler name to use to describe such people:
thieves.
 |
| The Parable of the Wicked Workers of the Vineyard Andrey Mironov |
To collect what’s due, without the benefit of constable or sheriff, the landowner sends his own emissaries: a series of servants. It doesn’t go well. Number one gets smacked around; Number two gets the stuffing knocked out of him; Number three, sadly, is murdered. Can you imagine being part of the servant corps, hoping – praying – that your lottery number isn’t pulled for the draft? No thanks!
Now, at this point, I hope you
are asking some questions, questions like, “What in the wide, wide world of
sports is the landowner thinking?” We can understand sending the first, maybe
even a second servant to collect the rent. But after the second incident, evidence
is mounting that the sharecroppers aren’t going to play nice. With workers’
comp payments skyrocketing, what kind of landowner sends yet a third servant?
None who understand any kind of risk management, no one who have any value for
life. So, why would the landowner continue to send servants when the chances of
a peaceful resolution are falling faster than water tables in the Panhandle? Because the landowner, at heart, is kind and
merciful and he wants to give those tenants every possible opportunity to stop
their foolishness, to stop being thieves, and instead return to a faithful
relationship with the master.
The servant can breathe easier
when the draft is stopped and the landowner strategizes to send his son
instead. You should be asking more questions, now, questions like, “Is this guy
mad? Has he gone coo-coo for cocoa puffs? Sending his own son even as he’s
still paying disability and funeral benefits for his other three servants? If
this happened to servants, what makes him think the son will be treated better?
This makes no sense! Who would do such a thing?”
Who, indeed? And, why?
What kind of master would continue
to send servants down the highway to the danger zone when recent history shows
no reason to expect anything other than further rejection? If that’s true of
servants, why would he determine to send his son as a debt collector with such
a risk of his being rejected – perhaps even killed?
This, friends, is a parable that
tells us something about the mercy of God towards sinful mankind – even at the
risk of His own servants, those who speak on His behalf….and even at the risk
of His own Son.
Isaiah 5 helps us paint the
picture to understand the parable. The vineyard is the nation of Israel and the
plantings, that is the vines themselves, are the people of Israel. The tenant
farmers represent the Jewish leaders. The parable, then, illustrates the
rejection of God’s authority by the Pharisees, et al, openly defying His word,
His gifts, His promises. They have been doing it for quite some time. To call these
people to repentance, God sent His servants, called prophets, to call the
tenant-pharisees to repentance and properly care for God’s own. Prophets
represent God by speaking on His behalf: “Thus saith the Lord.” Don’t try to
identify who the servants specifically represent. The three collectively
represent all of the prophets who were physically hurt, ignored, and killed for
His name’s sake, culminating with the martyred John the Baptizer. So, if God’s
people reject His messengers, His prophets, His spokesmen who proclaimed His
call to repentance what else could God do?
A moment ago, I said that in the
parable the landowner was kind and merciful, wanting his tenants to repent. If
that is true in a parable, it is infinitely more true of the Father in Heaven.
His greatest desire for Israel (and, again, for all mankind) was repentance,
that they would turn from their foolish, arrogant, selfish sinfulness and live.
With them rejecting His prophets, God chose to send the Word made flesh, His
Son, His only-begotten Son with a simple message: repent, for the Kingdom – the
reigning of Jesus – is here.
I also said that this parable is
unique in that it foretells something. This parable is speaking about the
rejection of Jesus as the tenants plot the murder of the landowner’s Son.
“We’ll gain the inheritance,” they foolishly thought in the parable, as if the father
would surrender what is rightfully his to murdering thieves. Their rejection of the master’s kindness and
mercy, rejecting his servants and, finally, his own son, was full and complete
folly. What kind of fools would do such a thing? Then again, the landowner’s
sending his son was folly, itself. There
was no reason, no evidence that the tenants would change their unfaithful
stewardship after going oh-for-three with his servants. Yet, the landowner
sends his son to the rebellious tenants to give them a final chance to repent –
that is, to pay the balance owed and become favorable sharecroppers, again. We
know that doesn’t work, though. They foolishly murder the son.
In much the same way that Nathan
used the story of a rich king and a poor neighbor’s pet lamb to gain the
empathetic response from King David after his adulterous relationship with
Bathsheba, Jesus’ parable has garnered an empathetic response his Pharisaic
listeners. He brings the story to them by asking, “So, what’s the
landowner/father going to do to those rebellious tenants?” There was a question
hidden in His question to them, as if He’s asking, “Do you get what I’m asking?
Are you going to repent or keep killing those whom My Father sends to you?”
They don’t realize that they
answer prophetically, judging against themselves by saying, “He will put those
wretches to a miserable death and let out the vineyard to other tenants who
will give him the fruits in due season.”
Jesus minces no words when He
agrees with their assessment. It’s no longer a story, though. It becomes a
first-person narrative addressed to them.
He goes back to Kingdom talk: “Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God
will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” It’s
as if He is saying, “Those whom you find undesirable, they will be the ones in
the Kingdom because of faith and repentance. Meanwhile you all, so worried
about your own appearances and façades, will be left outside the kingdom. That
which was once yours will be taken.
There was no reason for Jesus to
hope the authorities would change their disbelief in hearing this story. So,
why does He tell the story? Why does He continue to speak to the Jewish leaders
who are rapidly tiring of His Messianic work?
The same reason as in the
parable: as the landowner sent his son to give them the opportunity to repent,
God sends His Son to give the people an opportunity to repent, believe, and
trust in Christ alone for the mercy and grace of God.
We know this parable is a foreshadowing
of Jesus’ crucifixion, that the Jewish leaders will take the Son outside the
Vineyard, outside the city walls of Jerusalem, and crucify Jesus. They reject
Him, His authority, His divine Sonship. They can’t stop the Father’s plan of rescue,
though. He uses their sinful jealousy, taking what they intended for evil and
using it for the salvation of the world.
