26th Week in Ord. Time, Sunday – 27th September 2020 — Gospel: Mt 21,28-32
Yes-sayers response to God’s kingdom
In the parable of the two sons, Jesus provides an allegorical equivalent: the tax-collectors and prostitutes, as first son, and the chief priests and elders, as second son. The first son is a no-sayer denoting the Gentiles, while the second son is a yes-sayer representing the Jews. The parable is directed to the second son, the religious elite of Jesus’ time, who are not doing the father’s will. Just as Israel was often identified as God’s children, the vineyard symbolized Israel. Therefore, Jesus is not asking the chosen Israelites to comment on random, fictitious brothers, but to locate themselves within Israel’s foundational and continuing stories. But they continue the sad story of an unfaithful Israel, with John and with Jesus, which rejects the prophet sent to call God’s people to repentance.
Dividing the gospel in two parts, Jesus tells the parable in the first part (21,28-30) and interprets its content in the second part (21,31-32). The first part functions similar to another “two sons” parable (parable of the prodigal son and elder son, Lk 15,11-32) and echoes a favourite theme of Matthew, the split in the religious person between saying and doing (cf. 7,21-23; 12,50; 23,3-4). The second part continues the polemic against the Jewish leaders which began in 21,23-27 and uses once again John the Baptist as the central character. This part echoes an eschatological saying, “Truly, I say to you” in which Jesus proclaims what will be God’s judgment on the last day.
Jesus poses two questions to the religious elite, before and after narrating the parable. He takes the initiative to introduce the parable with “what do you think?” that calls for an interaction of the leaders (17,25; 18,12; 22,42). In the middle Jesus seeks an answer to his parable with “which of the two did the will of his father?” that forces each participant to pass personal judgment on himself. The leaders’ answer corresponds to Jesus’ teaching about doing God’s will (7,24-27; 12,46-50) and to his condemnation of hypocrisy (6,2-16; 7,5; 15,7; cf.22,18; 23,13-29). However, with the answer the religious leaders unknowingly condemn themselves for not doing God’s will. Therefore, while the religious elite do not enter God’s kingdom, the socially marginal and despised tax collectors and prostitutes do. In fact, Jesus points out the division that is existing within Israel: the excluded powerful elite who are hard hearted (like 19,8) and those from the margins who believe.
Jesus calls both groups of people as “sons” that identifies them as God’s children. But their actions, not their words, determined the true children, that is, the ones most willing to participate in the father’s business. Actions speak louder than words. In the allegory, Jesus equated involvement in the father’s vineyard with recognition of John’s baptism as a sign of God’s authority. The religious elite would not put their trust in John, even when they saw his effect on the common people. We can imagine the religious leaders as yes-sayers to God’s will in the Law and the sinners as no-sayers to it; but, when John the Baptist came, the sinners complied with God’s demand as set forth in John’s preaching, while the leaders did not. Since the latter’s initial rejection, there has been time to change their mind (the first son) or to live out their commitment (the second son).
During John’s ministry, there are no descriptions highlighting tax collectors and prostitutes being baptized by John (3,5-6). But Jesus’ merciful and transforming association with the marginalized tax collectors and sinners (9,10-11; 10,3; 11,19) are explicitly described. That is, tax collectors and prostitutes have believed John in that they have repented and are already experiencing God’s saving presence manifested in Jesus, for whom John prepared the way and to whom John bore witness. Thus, the marginal bear witness to God’s kingdom, but the religious elite have not availed themselves of this time or testimony, even after they have seen it. The religious elite not believing John means not believing Jesus. In fact the tax collectors and prostitutes give up their occupations and economic benefits for the sake of God’s kingdom (cf. 13,44-45; 19,16-22). But the religious elite continue to inflict economic and social harm through their greedy and unjust leadership.
