Lectionary Sermon for Sunday 21 September 2014 based on Matthew 20: 1 -16

We will be judged by how we are to people to whom we owe nothing.”                         Rabbi Hugo Grynn

The standard, and I suggest limited, way of looking at this reading from Matthew about the Labourer’s and the vineyard is to use it to gain insights about God. If for the owner of the vineyard you read God, then at one level the reading might be telling us about the generous nature of God. In practice this unfortunately leads to some fairly strange ideas about theology.

For example for a period of several centuries some branches of Christianity taught that “the last shall be first” meant that just so long as you confessed just before your death it didn’t matter much what you did during your lifetime. The difficulty here is that this implies that religion has nothing to offer this life. There is also the problem that since the next life, whatever that might mean, is largely a matter of speculation in that there are just about as many beliefs about the nature of what the word heaven is intended to mean as there are versions of Christianity. Some even take “the last shall be first” even more literally. Theodosius, the Roman Emperor who made it compulsory to become Christian and persecuted those who failed to convert was also famous for his thirteen statues he commissioned to represent the apostles.
You may already know that when he was asked why thirteen – instead of twelve – he explained that his was the thirteenth statue. When asked why his was the biggest of the statues he replied modestly – “the last shall be first”.

But not only is this a shallow reading of the parable – it is even not paying attention to what Jesus was actually saying. He does not in fact say God is like the landowner who goes out to hire labourers. What he actually says is that the kingdom of God is like a landowner …..
In Jesus teaching he seems to be implying that the kingdom of God is the situation we become part of when we accept the call to follow.

In other words referring to the kingdom of God, instead of God, is really placing us in the parable. After all, if in symbolic language we wish to identify with the kingdom of heaven, then the story may not so much tell us about God, but rather gives us a clue as to how we might treat others.
Even although Jesus’ parable has been around a long time there are few signs that all those who attend Churches see it as having anything to do with their behaviour.

I want to give three examples of Church congregations which demonstrate what can happen. The first is something told to me about one particular Church where a woman said that she had shared with another woman saying that after twelve years she felt she was just beginning to be accepted as part of the congregation. The woman she confided to responded that she had been attending for even longer and she still felt she was not quite accepted.

My second example is a personal one. When I started teaching at Wesley College many years ago I used to take services regularly as a lay preacher at one particular small country Church. They were lovely folk – but never once did Shirley and I get invited to a congregation member’s house. What is more I noted that other visitors had the same reception – almost as if they had to have done the long service before qualifying for proper friendship. When we shifted to Papakura, Shirley and I went somewhat tentatively to Church on a Sunday morning and were not only greeted and made to feel extremely welcome we were also invited to a meal on the first day. Needless to say we reciprocated and started attending that Church as a place of friends. Now years later I wonder what might have happened in the little country Church if my wife and I had done more to invite members of the congregation to our home.

My third example happened at a Church in our neighbourhood where I was told an elderly woman had arrived as a newcomer and after two or three weeks announced to the congregation that since she really knew nobody, she had divided the congregation up into manageable groups and was inviting first those with surnames A to L to her house for a pot luck meal. According to my informant this has had a transforming effect on the friendliness of the congregation.

Yet in every walk of life this seems to be the exception rather than the rule.
The kingdom of God is like……
Well it certainly can’t remain like words in a book – even clever words like the words of Jesus in a Bible. Stories and uplifting words can give encouragement but they are a poor substitute for the real thing: the lived faith.

If the kingdom of God is the equivalent of the open hearted landowner who does not demand extended evidence of extended genuine effort before giving a full measure in return, then perhaps one message we might receive from the parable is that is not so much a description of our entitlement – but rather guidance to us on how to treat others.

What would an election be like if those who claimed to be Christian chose their polical affiliation  first and foremost on how the policies looked after not so much our own interestest but rather the interests of those who were the most vulnerable, the late comers to our communities.Whether or not we are aware of Jesus words in the parable is not then the point. Rather the issue is: would this attitude Jesus identified of treating even latecomers with due concern and consideration whether they had recently arrived or had been here for the long term be what others would notice in our behaviour..
To be truthful I am not sure whether this parable represents workable economics in the narrow sense of the word, but there are other values in life which we instinctively know matter more than the exchange of money.

I started my talk this morning with a quote from one person whose views I value in this respect namely Rabbi Hugo Grynn. Rabbi Grynn was a Jewish survivor of Auschwitz where he had been sent as a small boy.

His key insight was a single phase “We will be judged by how we are to people to whom we owe nothing.” He had won the right to speak because he was until his relatively recent death a few years ago as one who lived this principle as a campaigner for refugee rights.

From Auschwitz Hugo Grynn moved to the United Kingdom, where he worked first to become a Rabbi and from that point to become one of the United Kingdom’s most respected spiritual leaders, writers and broadcasters. He was entitled to his view because in his life it was clear he cared about those who deserved nothing from him.

What of us and our dealings with people to whom we owe nothing. When we reflect on how we are going with such people, what do we see? How are we are towards people such as, the very old, the very young, the retarded, those who don’t sound educated or who appear to be new immigrants, the strangers, those who have fallen from grace – alcoholics – and yes the unemployed…..those still waiting for employment chances at the end of the day because they werent seen as employable in the first selection.   Would others see those kingdom characteristics in us?

If Jesus shows by his dealings with those who represented the undeserving that in the kingdom of God there is a place for such people – then we too – if we claim membership in the kingdom of God, should also be making our offer to the people to whom we owe nothing.

As a guiding principle it is not only of value because it affords dignity and worth to all people regardless of their circumstance; but more than this it is of value because it as a by-product we may just discover authentic meaning and purpose whatever we might previously have thought about our status and power.

In the parable of the labourers in the vinyard, the landowner is thoughtful of the undeserving – first of all in chosing workers originally passed over – but then in giving those workers more than they technically deserved. The people who were in fact owed virtually nothing.

Even if it is not what we might have done – we can sense the basic goodness in such an approach. But then the story of Christianity through the centuries is one of handing on the mantle. The landowner and the labourers story is a story of the kingdom of God to which we too might aspire. How will we in our turn make our offer to people to whom we owe nothing.

This entry was posted in Perspectives of God, Sermons and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Lectionary Sermon for Sunday 21 September 2014 based on Matthew 20: 1 -16

  1. dave says:

    According to dictionary.com, a congregation is an assembly of persons brought together for common religious worship.
    If the people are there only to worship God then many people have gathered for their one-to-one connection to God, not to form a bond with the others there. It seems little different than thousands attending a sporting event when many gather to view (and to participate vicariously if cheering or doing the wave) but not to make new friends.
    As I have suggested in other comments, a person that is consumed by the pursuit of the after-life in heaven is probably less concerned with this life (or at least the details not directly affecting that pursuit), and so there is possibly less effort at compassionately dealing with family, friends, neighbors, and others in the congregation.
    Some preachers push the concept that we are all sinners and it is only through the grace of God that we can be saved. On a simple level this means we all have faults but only when we accomplish a special connection to God will we be on the path to salvation. Those unable to accomplish that connection are therefore not worthy of salvation. That also suggests that if most people are not worthy of God’s special grace (like non-Christians?) then are they worthy of my extra compassion?
    If Jesus was attempting to get his followers to show more empathy for others, that message has been lost in contemporary churches when the priority is eternal salvation.

  2. peddiebill says:

    I like the example you give of the manner in which emphasis on the next life takes away concern for actions in this life.
    I wonder however if an essential difference between a Church congregation and say a football crowd is that in coming together for the Church service sooner or later they are bound to encounter the teachings of Jesus and his emphasis on compassion. Surely if they take the teachings seriously it is not unreasonable to remind the members of the congregation that they should be interested in applying the teaching to their lives.
    While I fear you are at least partly correct in your final statement about the message being lost in contemporary Churches in response to the emphasis on salvation – I would want to say some contemporary churches in that many do seem to get the balance right.

  3. Pingback: God’s Economy Of Grace And Living The Paschal Mystery | New Thought Ministries

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.