I have a problem with this parable. There is something wrong with this parable that we often refer to as the “Parable of the Talents”. It just doesn’t fit in with the rest of the story Jesus has been sharing . . . it doesn’t fit the view of the Kingdom he has been speaking about . . . it equates God as the opposite of what Jesus tells us. You probably guessed that this is not one of my favorite parables of Jesus . . . and, maybe, it is not one of yours either.
How we view and understand this parable comes down to how we have been taught, what we have learned, and what we have experienced when it comes to our faith. Because of this, there is more than one way to look at this parable . . . more than one way of interpreting it.
Traditionally this parable is most often interpreted as having to do “gifts and talents” and whether they are increased for the one investing. In this case a wealthy landowner. The landowner is going on a trip. Before he leaves for the trip, he calls three employees and gives to them a sum of money that they are to take care. If we want to be thematic to this interpretation, we would say that he asked them to be “stewards” of the money given to them. Each employee does his own thing with the money . . . the first two invest, the third buries it.
Upon return from the trip the landowner wants an accounting of his money. The first two increased the landowner’s money . . . double it! Each of them is lavishly rewarded. The third one returns the exact sum of the money that was given . . . no profit, no loss. This angers the landowner. When asked why he had not done like the other two, the man tells him: “I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter seed; so I was afraid, and I went and hid your talent in the ground. Here you have what is yours.”
Well, that probably was not the thing to tell the landowner. It only angered him that much more. In his anger he casts the employee out . . . throws him out into the darkness . . . puts him out among the ordinary people. He is punished and denied access to the landowner, his properties, and his wealth.
The moral of this interpretation of the parable: Don’t waste the talents God has given you. We are all entrusted with talents . . . resources . . . and, God gives them to be used, not buried.
Now remember this is supposed to be a “Kingdom” parable. As a “Kingdom” parable it is supposed to give the listener a picture and understanding of God’s Kingdom. What sort of picture does this parable paint? Well, it seems to be based on merit . . . the better the merits, the better the reward and privileges. Only those who succeed are rewarded. Those who fail . . . well, they are punished. Doesn’t quite seem to add up to what Jesus had been teaching about the Kingdom of God or God. Seems to go against it all.
But! That is one interpretation.
There is another interpretation. It is one less taught or preached, but a legitimate one none the less. In this understanding of the parable one considers the parable by “who, what, when, where, and why” of the story. In seeing the story from this view, we realize that Jesus is telling the story to peasants . . . to the poor. When he mentions the landowner, it is quite clear as to who he is referring . . . he is talking about the wealthy, the powerful, the mover and shakers, the ones in control of the system. These are the ones who owned their own homes, who could raise taxes, alter the laws, put constraints on freedom, and keep the poor in poverty.
Because of this the audience knows that the three employees who are called to watch over the money given to them are just as much a part of the system. Charged with increasing the landowner’s wealth, the three have at their disposal any means available to accomplish the goal . . . even putting more pressure on the poor to produce. The system was corrupt, and the rich continued to get richer and the poor poorer.
Like the first interpretation, the first two employees are rewarded for their work at increasing the landowner’s wealth. Also, like the first interpretation, the third employee is punished for failing the landowner’s wishes. But it is with this third employee that this interpretation hinges. In verse 24, it seems as the failing employee makes excuses . . . he was afraid. In the first and more popular interpretation we read this as him being scared to do the work necessary to increase the money. But actually, it is a confrontation. The man confronts the landowner and lays it down as he sees it.
The landowner is not a good person. He is a mean person . . . a harsh person . . . who only seeks to benefit himself. He reaped where he did not sow. He gathered where he did not scatter. In other words, the employee was pointing out that the landowner benefited through means that were not quite up on the moral or legal side of things, and that in his power he could crush those who went against him. This employee did not like this and said so. He would not participate in such wrong doing. He would not participate knowing that there would be harsh repercussions . . . which scared him.
For standing up to the landowner and the corrupted system, the consequences were swift and harsh. He was punished . . . he is fired. He is thrown back out into the poor. But he knew the risk. He was willing to be poor, to live among the oppressed, in order not to participate in the corruption . . . to not be like the landowner. Someone had to speak for the people, and he did.
In this interpretation of the parable, it is not a “kingdom” parable as much as it is a parable about the world . . . about reality. Here Jesus is giving the people an illustration of how the world is—and that sometimes we must be willing to risk and sacrifice our own comfort for the greater good . . . that we have to step out against the system . . . to not buy in . . . to not condone the oppression that is around us.
This interpretation fits the Jesus I know, love, and understand.
What about you? Which interpretation and understanding of the parable works for you? Remember, it all comes down to how you see it based on what you have been taught, what you have learned, and your own experiences.
In either understanding of the parable there is a common theme. That theme is in how the employees saw the landowner . . . which we can interpret for the parable’s sake as how God is viewed. Is God one whose relationship with us is based on merit . . . based on what we can accomplish and accrue when it comes to being faithful? The reward is based on actions. Is that the God Jesus preached and taught? Or is God one whose relationship with us is based on love, grace, and mercy? A God where all are welcomed and desired to take their place in God’s family. A God of fear or love? A God of grace or condemnation?
How do you view God? And, with that view . . . that understanding of God, how do you invest the talent of your faith? How you view God will determine how you invest. For me, I take the more Jesus-like understanding of God. A loving, grace-filled, and merciful God who never separates God’s self from us . . . who never abandons us . . . and patiently waits for us.
We are blessed as the children of God . . . as the followers of Jesus. We each have gifts and talents bestowed upon us to increase our relationships with God and others . . . to bring about God’s Kingdom in this time and place . . . to make a difference in the world. There is no end to the blessings we have been given. The question becomes how we are going to invest them. Are we going to invest them for the glory of God and all the children of God, or are we going to use them as some sort of system that separates and divides . . . that oppresses . . . that takes away life instead of producing life.
The answer to that question is up to us and how we see God. Invest wisely . . . your faith depends upon it. Amen.
No comments:
Post a Comment