Matthew 21:28-32

 TWENTY-SIXTH SUNDAY IN ORDINARY TIME – YEAR A

Commentary by Fr. Fernando Armellini

A good Sunday to all.

Recall that last week we heard the parable of the vinedresser who was very concerned about the work of his vineyard and had gone five times to the village square to find workers. In the parable we will hear today, Jesus takes up the argument of the vineyard. He will also return to it in next week's parable. Undoubtedly, the work to be done in this vineyard is of great interest to its owner, who is, of course, God.

Last Sunday, we said that the vineyard is the kingdom of God, the new world, the new humanity that Christ's disciples are called to build. Last week, Jesus invited us to identify ourselves with the workers of the first hour: the determined, the generous, those who immediately put their hands to work, and those who meet in the town square at 5 a.m. But at the end, when it is time to pay, he also made us identify with the workers of the "evil eye," that is, those who do not see with a good eye that God gives all his love even to those who do not deserve it because he is good.

Last Sunday, we were the servants. Today, Jesus promotes us in his parable; he makes us go up a grade and places us on a much higher level. In the parable, we will hear we will be the owner's children. And, since we belong to the family, the vineyard, which is the family's property, also concerns us: it involves a different commitment because it is ours. We are better disposed to be interested and committed. 

To whom is this parable addressed? Jesus arrived in Jerusalem a few days ago, and as soon as he arrived, the first thing he did was to purify the Temple—he expelled the sellers— and so began his disputes with the religious authorities, who already frowned upon him. They have been putting up with him for three years; they consider him a heretic who teaches false doctrines about God and does not practice the prescriptions of the rabbinical tradition.

Matthew tells us that, in those days, Jesus spent the nights in Bethany, and in the morning, he went to the city and began to teach in the Temple, probably under Solomon's porch. It is there that we find him today, and it is there, on Solomon's porch, that the elders and the high priests confront him and ask him, "Who has authorized you to do what you have done and who has allowed you to teach here in the Temple? You have no title to do these things." 

Jesus responds with a counter-question, "Who gave the Baptist authority to preach: you or God?" They do not answer him. In the end, they say, "We don't know." But what did Jesus want to tell them? Men establish authority, and there is another superior that comes from God. Jesus said that God gave him the authority to preach, as he gave it to the prophets. They were the ones who had to communicate to the people those words that God had put on their lips. So, there is a higher authority than you.

Let us now continue with the parable. Let us observe that Jesus has interlocutors who are not sinners, dissolute, no; they are religious, pious, observant, scrupulous of all the commandments, respectable, and the highest religious authority. Jesus narrates this parable for them. Let us see how it involves them:

“What is your opinion? A man had two sons.”

When a rabbi began a parable by speaking of a father and a son, everyone understood that he was referring to God and Israel. Israel is called in the Old Testament "the son of God." Through the mouth of Moses, God says to Pharaoh: "Israel is my firstborn son; let my son go." Also, by the mouth of the prophet Hosea he says: "Out of Egypt I have called my son." He echoes the heartfelt plea of these people in exile and turns to the Lord, saying: "You are our Father. We are clay, the work of your hands.” That is why Jesus' interlocutors are astonished that he began the parable by speaking of a father and two sons. God has only one son; pagans, tax collectors, sinners, and prostitutes are impure people, not sons. God has only one son: Israel.

Let us pause for a moment. Are we quite sure that it was only the religious leaders of Jesus' time? Have we not heard some Christians reasoning in the same way? Are those who believe that God has only good children, those who keep all the commandments, and those who have gone astray are not children of God? Every person is indelibly imprinted with the image of God. To each person, God has given his own life. It is necessary to think before bringing children into the world, but this paternity cannot be erased once they have been brought into the world. Let us keep this in mind: God has two children, the good and the less good; also, the less good remain his sons and daughters, even the criminals... let us mention that word that disturbs us so much: they are always sons and daughters of God.

Then, let us remember that divine filiation is not obtained by merit; therefore, no one is more of a son than another because he is more holy. The resemblance with the heavenly Father may be very disfigured, but the identity of sons and daughters of God cannot be erased. Divine life is received as a gift, just as biological life is accepted as a gift from parents. And this leads us to understand the universal fraternity of God's sons and daughters.

Having clarified this point that God has two sons, the good and the less good, and accepting this truth, Jesus now wants to teach a lesson with the parable. Whom does he want to convert? Undoubtedly, the pagans, the thieves, the bandits, the publicans, the sinners... They are not good people to imitate; they, too, must change and be converted. But today's parable is to convert the righteous, those of "the first hour," those who think they alone are God's children. Let us listen to how the father turns to his children:

He came to the first and said, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’ He said in reply, ‘I will not,’ but afterwards he changed his mind and went.

He came to the first and said, ‘Son, go out and work in the vineyard today.’ This is not a good translation. The Greek text reads προσελθὼν (proselthon, from prosérjomai); some translations say "approaching" the first. He does not present himself as an important sovereign giving order, no, but as a father who approaches with affection because he wants to involve his son in the work of the vineyard; he wants him to understand that it is a family good, that he should be interested in this work. He takes him by the arm to convince him and then says a nice word, son. He does not say pais or huios. He calls him Τέκνον (téknon), which comes from the verb tikto and means "to give birth." There is a maternal nuance in this way of addressing the son.

"Go out and work in the vineyard today." That is to say: "Be aware that you are a son, not a servant. The vineyard is ours; it is of interest to all of us who live in this house; if you want to give meaning to your day, go and work in the vineyard, commit yourself, and make your life beautiful by giving it great meaning". The 'today' represents our whole life, which must be played out in the work of the Lord's vineyard. And to work in the vineyard of the Lord means to produce grapes and wine, that is, love, joy, and life for every son and daughter of God. 

The answer is hostile and harsh: "I don't want to" (Οὐ θέλω, Ou thelo in Greek). This son had other plans; he thought his day would make more sense doing what he had in mind. The NO of this parable is a sign of our biological nature's rejection of Jesus' proposal of commitment to his Gospel. His proposal is demanding; if one immediately answers 'Yes,' it means one has not understood. Some think that what the Lord asks of us as work in the Lord's vineyard is some devotion, some spiritual intimacy. Then one says, even immediately, 'Yes.' But when one understands what the Gospel asks, one necessarily says 'No.' It is a sign that one has understood. We come little by little to discard the plans we had in our head because we are this first son (later, we will also be the second, but in the meantime, we are the first).

“But afterwards, he changed his mind." How did he change his choice and position? He reflected and changed his mind because he realized that the one who asked him to go to the vineyard was not a master; it was his father whose love he knew; he knew that his father loved him well. Indeed, he thought: "If he loves me and gives me this indication, it means that what he proposes to me is beautiful even if it is demanding and exhausting; I can trust this father because he wants my 'Today'—that is my whole life—to be beautiful and meaningful." If he had thought of his father as a master who pulls him and imposes on him without reason what he orders, then he would have chosen to do only what he likes. 

This is why we priests often err in our catechesis when we present what the word of God demands of us without first saying who is addressing this word to us. Only when we have understood that the one who asks us to make certain choices is the one who loves us then we trust him; if, on the contrary, we take these instructions as orders followed even by some threats, then we do not listen to what the father invites us to do. 

Now, let's see what happens with the second child:

The man came to the other son and gave the same order. He replied, ‘Yes, sir,’ but did not go. Which of the two did his father’s will?” They answered, “The first.”

To the second son, the father also approached (προσελθὼν, proselthón); he also "drew near" and took him by the arm to persuade him to go into the vineyard. Surprising is the immediate response of this second son: YES, LORD! (Greek: Ἐγώ κύριε, egó kírie, "I, sir!") He does not say 'father'; he says 'lord.' For him, these are the dispositions of a master who gives orders which must be obeyed. Why does he respond so forcefully to what the master asks? (The master here represents God.) He immediately answers 'Yes' because he does not understand. He describes that part of Israel that did not understand what the Lord asked of his people and invented that list of sacrifices, incense, burnt offerings, and fasts... But... was that what the Lord had asked? If they had understood it, they would have done like the first son and would have said NO, because the Lord asked for justice, love for the poor, the widows, the orphan, the foreigner... Instead, they limited the adherence to the will of this Lord to many things that were human precepts.

The prophet Isaiah says it well in chapter 29: "These people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, and their worship of me is human precept and routine" (Is 29:13). In Psalm 50 the Lord says to his people: "I do not reproach you for your sacrifices, nor for your burnt offerings that are always before me" ... What is the problem? "Who asked you? I ask you for love of the poor and justice; these interests me". This is the reason: this second son represents that part of the people of Israel who said Yes without understanding what the Lord was asking of them. 

Jesus asks these interlocutors before him: "Which of the two did his father’s will?" They said to him: "The first”—is an invitation that Jesus also makes us reconsider our position. The interlocutors of Jesus' time are already dead. This parable, and therefore this second son, represents all of us. How many times have Christians said Yes to God immediately because we did not understand what he was asking of us? We have invented all our religious practices, which often only serve to soothe our conscience, but we do not allow ourselves to be involved in what he is asking of us: the gift of our life. If we had understood this, we would have done as the first son did.

Jesus said in the Sermon on the Mount: "Not everyone who says to me "Lord," "Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven." We have seen ourselves portrayed in these two sons because we have felt the rejection, we have said No many times, and then we have also converted; we have tried to say Yes. We are also a little like the second son, who tries to appease his conscience with the practices we invent for ourselves.

But there is still a third son whom we should resemble. Although not mentioned in the parable, we can understand who this son is: he is the Only Begotten of the Father in heaven, Jesus of Nazareth. He answered Yes and put into practice all the Father wanted of him.

And now, Jesus directly addresses the religious leaders of his people and applies the parable to them. Let us listen:

Jesus said to them, “Amen, I say to you, tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you. When John came to you in the way of righteousness, you did not believe him; but tax collectors and prostitutes did. Yet even when you saw that, you did not later change your minds and believe him.”

Be careful because we could misunderstand Jesus' words: "Tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the kingdom of God before you." Jesus is not saying that these are good and that, on the other hand, the pious Jews that Jesus had before him are bad. Sometimes, we hear it said, "Those who do not go to church are better than those who do... Jesus said so, too.” It is not true; tax collectors and prostitutes are not models to imitate; they are out of the way; they must be converted because they are making a mistake. 

Jesus is saying that these people will come before the others and enter the kingdom of God first. But how is it that some arrive first and others arrive later? What prevents the pious people, those excellent, righteous Jews, from entering first? What prevents them from adhering to Jesus's proposal with his Gospel? This is the answer: The impediment is that religious practice that they have invented, those human dispositions that appease their consciences, that make them feel that they are already in good standing with God and, therefore, that they no longer need conversion, that they no longer need anything else. The tax collectors and prostitutes do not have this spiritual screen that assures them they are well. They are people in need of salvation, and when they heard the Baptist invite them to conversion, they let themselves be converted and came first to enter the kingdom of God; that is to say, they adhered to the proposal of man made by Jesus of Nazareth. They were converted. The Baptist had shown them the Messiah, and they accepted him.

Those who felt secure in their religion, the chief priests, the elders, the scribes, and the Pharisees, did not allow themselves to be converted and lost the opportunity to enter immediately into the Lord's vineyard. Let us ask ourselves the question: We who feel that we are doing well, could we perhaps be the second son, that is, the one who said Yes? And let us go a little further: Does our Yes lead us to work in the vineyard? 

Let us ask ourselves how much joy we produce with our life, commitment, and work. This is the wine. If we make this joy, it means that, although we may have initially said No, we have given our Yes.

I wish you all a good Sunday and a good week.