Generous Landowner

“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for the usual daily wage, he sent them into his vineyard. When he went out about nine o’clock, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace; and he said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and I will pay you whatever is right.’ So they went. When he went out again about noon and about three o’clock, he did the same. And about five o’clock he went out and found others standing around; and he said to them, ‘Why are you standing here idle all day?’ They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard.’ When evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his manager, ‘Call the laborers and give them their pay, beginning with the last and then going to the first.’ When those hired about five o’clock came, each of them received the usual daily wage. Now when the first came, they thought they would receive more; but each of them also received the usual daily wage. And when they received it, they grumbled against the landowner, saying, ‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong; did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? Take what belongs to you and go; I choose to give to this last the same as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or are you envious because I am generous?’ So the last will be first, and the first will be last.”

Matthew 20:1-16, NRSV



Earlier this week I told my house mates what scripture this sermon was going to be about and I got this response: “I know that parable, and I don't like it.” I totally understand why I got that response too. I confess that often when reading the gospels there are stories that I frankly don't like. Some stories seem completely unfair.

The Parable of the landowner is definitely one of them: laborers that work different amounts receive the same pay. Imagine for a second if a corporate executive decided to adopt a similar renumeration policy and started to give every employee an identical paycheck no matter how many hours were worked. Some people would be livid. Others would be very happy. Either way, there would not be much motivation for people to work. If I can get paid for a full eight hour shift by clocking in at four and getting off at five, why on earth would I go to work at nine? The scandal that would result from such a decision would most certainly be epic and the business would probably quickly fail.

Even more drastic would be if employees that only worked for a company for a few days were able to have the same wealth of a loyal employee that worked for a company since its inception. Often with startup companies, the first employees are able to make the most money, especially through employee stock options. For instance, at Starbucks, all employees were offered stock options starting in 1991. An employee making $20,000 at that time received about $2400 in stock offerings. In just five years time that employee could have cashed in the stock options at around $50,000. (From Howard Schultz book Pour your heart into it) Just think what those stocks are worth today! Also, the longer a person works for a company, the bigger their salary gets.

In our world, people that have been working for a long time simply make more money. That's why this parable is so shocking. And it should be! But this parable starts telling us its about something different than the way our world works, doesn't it? Lets take a look at the passage.

Verse one starts out with a connecting word: “For.” There is clearly a connection being made to whatever came before. In fact, Many scholars argue that Matthew 19 and 20 should not be separated:

Warren Carter in his book Matthew and the Margins titles his section on these two chapters: "The Alternative Households of God's Empire." He writes:
The coherence of these two chapters resides in pervasive cultural understandings of households. ... They [Aristotelean tradition, Neopythagoreans, and Hellenistic Judaism] understood the household to consist of four dimensions, namely, three relationships (husband-wife; father-children; master-slave) and the male's task of earning wealth. A power dynamic controlled the relationships in which the husband/father/master ruled over the wife/children/slaves. The household was hierarchical and patriarchal in that the male held power over women and children. It was marked by strict gender differentiation. ...
The sections of chapters 19-20 reflect this household pattern: the husband-wife relationship (including divorce, 19:3-12), children (19:13-15), procuring wealth (19:16-30), being slaves (20:17-28). In addition, 20:1-16 is a parable about a householder administering his estate and hiring workers.
But while the chapters utilize this household structure, they do not endorse this cultural norm. Rather, siding with some other minority cultural views, the two chapters subvert this hierarchical and patriarchal structure by instructing disciples in a more egalitarian pattern (cf. 20:12). Husbands are not to rule over wives but to participate in a "one-flesh" relationship (19:3-12); all disciples are children, there are no parents (19:13-15); following Jesus, not procuring wealth and status, defines discipleship (19:16-30); all disciples are slaves like Jesus, there are no masters (20:17-28). The parable of the householder in 20:1-16 exemplifies God's distinctive and different ways of ordering life. The concluding story of Jesus healing the blind men who beg for mercy offers disciples hope that they too will be enabled by Jesus' power to live this alternative and against-the-grain existence (20:29-34). That is, as Jesus journeys to Jerusalem to die, the chapters provide disciples with instruction on an alternative household that befits the empire or reign of God. [pp. 376-7]
Chapter 19 concludes with the story of the rich young man that approached Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good must I do to have eternal life?” Jesus answer to the young man is to sell everything and give the money to the poor and come follow him. Then in verse 30, Jesus says, “But many who are first shall be last, and the last will be first.” Sound familiar?

Now in Chapter 20, in typical Parable fashion, Jesus begins to describe the Kingdom of Heaven. Its like a landowner-- a rich guy, just like the rich guy that approached Jesus before-- who hired laborers for his vineyard.

Apparently the scene Jesus described would have been familiar. The social structure in the Roman Empire was hierarchically ordered. A few powerful men ruled at the top of the pyramid while at the bottom, the local peasants and businessmen struggled for a meager living. The day laborers may have struggled the most in this society, as the marketplace was a volatile place to look for work. At least slaves knew where their next meal would come from and may have received healthcare because they were at least worth what their master paid for them.

Well, today's the lucky day for a few workers. The landowner approaches the first workers. They agree to a wage-- a denarius-- to go out to the fields to work. Now a denarius is not a lot of money. It was about enough to feed a peasant family for one day with none left to save. So, if the laborers didn't get their denarius for the day, their family didn't eat. To compare the denarius to a current US dollar, historians say that a denarius has the buying power to get about $20 worth of bread (Wikipedia). Comparitively, a laborer working for minimum wage today would be paid $58 before taxes for an eight hour work day. After this agreement is made, the landowner sends the first workers to the field.

Then when the landowner goes back to the marketplace at nine, noon, and three, he hires them and says “You also go into the vineyard, and I will pay you what is right.” Notice that this agreement looks very different than the first agreement. With the first workers, there is a specific amount that is agreed upon. Now the landowner simply says he will pay “what is right,” or we could also say, “what is just.” No specific wage is given. Furthermore, Jesus says, “then they went.” The first laborers were sent out to the field. These laborers “went.”

The last group of laborers is hired one hour before the end of the work day, about five o'clock. The owner goes back to the marketplace and asks the people there, “Why are you standing here idle all day?” When I first read this, I thought, “What a jerk!” I mean don't you think that this just adds insult to injury? They say, “Nobody hired us!” I imagine it being like that scene in the movie Fun with Dick and Jane where Jim Carey goes and joins bunch of Latino men outside the paint store waiting for someone to come and offer them work for the day. Only one truck comes to hire someone, so he gets in a scuff and ends up losing his wallet. Then when INS officers come he ends up getting deported to Mexico because he doesn't have “Papers.” We can laugh about Jim Carey's antics, but this parable may speak more than I know to people struggling with unemployment and hearing people say, “why aren't you working?”

So that's the first half of the Parable. The second half goes on to show how they were paid. The evening Comes, and as the law states in Deuteronomy that poor workers must be paid before sunset, the owner (litterally translated 'the lord') sets to have the laborers paid. One thing that puzzles me about the parable is why the owner has the manager summon and pay the workers what the owner feels is “right and just.” If the manage is the one giving the money, is he not the one that must take the complaints for the owner's renumeration? The owner also specifically asks the manager to do the payments in reverse order making it really awkward when the first workers don't get more than the last. I almost wander if the landowner knew that the interaction would be awkward and made the manager do his dirty work. I guess nobody ever said life would be easy or fun...

However, the order of the payments clearly illustrates that indeed the last are first and the first are last. The owner could have easily eased the tension had he simply given the money out in the opposite order. Yet order is everything in this story. The last to work are the first to get paid and the first to work are the last to get paid. Jesus wants it to be clear that the first workers witnessed the generosity of the landowner.

Quickly come the complaints. “Now when the first came they thought they would receive more...” The word 'Nomizō', (nah-meed-zoh) translated as 'thought' here implies that the first workers are making an assumption based on a custom or rule. In every instance 'Nomizō' is used in the book of Matthew, Jesus is challenging the assumption. For instance, Jesus said, “Do not think I came to abolish the law...” Here Jesus challenges the assumption that reward would be based on merit.

In verse 12, “They complained against the landowner, saying, 'These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat'” There are two complaints here. First, the first workers place themselves into a level above the workers that came later. There is an 'us and them' mentality that has been perpetuated by a society that is dominated by hierarchy. The second complaint is about the grueling nature of working in the sun. Have they forgotten so soon that if they hadn't been invited to work that day their family would not eat that evening? The very invitation to work is a gracious gift from the landowner.

The landowner responds to one of the grumblers. He sarcastically calls him 'friend,' which is evident from the other times that Jesus uses the same word to call someone 'friend' in Matthew, like when he called Judas 'friend' as he was being betrayed.

'Friend' the owner says, 'I have done you no wrong.' He shows that he has kept to the agreement, so there is nothing to complain about. Then, he harshly tells the worker to take his belongings and get out of there. He has chosen to distribute reward based on need rather than on merit. That's his right and that's his choice.

The worker of course doesn't like this, so in his envy, gives the landowner the evil eye. I find this very interesting. These are the reasons I love critically studying scripture. You end up noticing that words like 'envy' are literally translated 'give the evil eye.'

“So the last will be first and the first will be last.” And the first will give you the evil eye.

That's the parable. That's what the Kingdom of heaven is like. What have we learned?

I certainly don't think we can ignore the socio-politico-religious context from which Jesus is speaking. In the introduction to the book of Matthew in the Harper Collins Study Bible, Dennis Duling Describes the Roman Empire as
a hierarchically ordered, commercialized, advanced agrarian (peasant) society with no middle class. A few powerful men and their families ruled; and they were supported by bureaucrats, slaves, official priests, and a sophisticated military establishment. Those at the bottom of the socioeconomic pyramid were local businesspeople, artisans, and-- the vast majority-- peasant farmers and fishermen. There were also a few “expendables,” e.g., bandits, beggars, and prostitutes. With few exceptions, women always ranked below men, and children below both.

Jesus frequently in the gospel of Matthew is portrayed as an advocate for those at the bottom of the society and was thus in tension with the rulers. Jesus message about the upsidedown kingdom of heaven was in direct conflict with the kingdom of Rome.

Jesus also frequently rubbed against the Religious power of the day. The Pharisees were his opponents in Gallilee, and he even called them hypocrites in chapter 23. In Jerusalem it was the saducees he clashed with. Perhaps this parable is a warning to these Jews that they needed to be accepting of the Gentiles, giving up their status as 'chosen people'. AS Paul said in Galations, “...in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith. As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal 3)

A similar warning might go to the disciples as well. As the church grew, the disciples must not try to claim a spot ahead of newcomers to the faith. Later on in Chapter 20, Jesus is asked to place James and John on his left and right in his Kingdom. Jesus answer?
“You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones are tyrants over them. It will not be so among you; but whoever wishes to be great among you must be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you must be your slave; just as the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life a ransom for many.”

In God's Kingdom the last will be first and the first shall be last.

In God's kingdom, the economy is upside down. Reward is not based on work, but on need. Decisions are not driven by time but by love and compassion.

To finish on a personal note, I'd like you to ask yourself who you relate to in this parable.

Some of us may be the workers hired from the beginning. Something I've noticed in some churches I've been to is that people who have been a part of the congregation for a long time-- some 70+ years of their life-- have trouble seeing new people join the church and make changes. Do we treat everyone in church with the same respect or grumble because some people are treated well when we don't think they deserve it? Sometimes life just seems totally unfair.

Some of us may be the workers that waited all day at the marketplace for someone to hire us. Unemployment is a very real issue. In fact a study done in 2006 showed that on any given day, approximately 117,600 workers are either looking for day-labor jobs or working as day laborers . (http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/uicued ) They may be standing in front of paint stores just like Jim Carey's character.

Some of us yet may be the manager of the landowner, doing the dirty work and taking all the flak. Like a messenger with a bad message to give, we're left enduring the reactions meant for someone else.

Finally, some of us may be landowners who try to be generous and make sure everyone has enough but all we get is complaints.

No matter who you relate to, If you're a first or a last or somewhere in the middle, Jesus shows us that we're all gonna eat. In the end everyone gets a denarius!

Our father in heaven, hallowed be your name. Your Kingdom come, your will be done. Give us today our daily bread and forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors. Lead us not to temptation but deliver us from evil. Yours is the kingdom and power and glory forever.

Amen.