Actions Speak Louder Than Words
Preaching
The Parables Of Jesus
Applications For Contemporary Life
"What do you think? A man had two sons; he went to the first and said, 'Son, go and work in the vineyard today.' He answered, 'I will not'; but later he changed his mind and went. The father went to the second and said the same; and he answered, 'I go, sir'; but he did not go. Which of the two did the will of his father?" They said, "The first." Jesus said to them, "Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you. For John came to you in the way of righteousness and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes believed him; and even after you saw it, you did not change your minds and believe him."
Theme
We have all heard the adage that actions speak louder than words. Today we are presented in the daily newspaper headlines with numerous incidents where the actions of people are inconsistent with the words they profess. We are also bombarded with the idea that reward must follow any action. Society tells us that tasks are not worth our effort unless there is a pot of gold or some other significant prize that awaits the completion of our effort. We who bear the name Christian must stand against this tide of rhetoric and reward and profess by action as well as word our faith in Jesus. Christians must be willing to do what is right because it is right. The reward in this life may at times be the cross of ridicule or rejection, but we can expect no better lot than the one we follow. Conversion to a life of action consistent with the ideas we express on our lips will one day bring us to God and eternal life.
Spiritual Food For The Journey
Martin Luther King, Jr., leader of the American civil rights movement from December 1955 until his assassination in April 1968, often echoed the conviction of Mahatma Gandhi, the great Indian freedom fighter, one generation earlier: "We have the right to protest for right." The civil rights movement in the United States demonstrated how a people long denied freedom and the inalienable rights guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- were able to use nonviolent protest to change unjust laws and practices and transform the minds of many to a more equitable understanding of life. Dr. King firmly believed that his philosophy of nonviolence, derived from many sources in his educational development, would be effective if actions were consistent with words. When he electrified a crowd of some 200,000 people in August 1963 with his famous "I Have a Dream" speech during the March on Washington, King laid the groundwork for future years that would ultimately bring the end to "Jim Crow" and at least a beginning to the conversion of America's penchant toward racism.
We all know that actions do speak loudly, but most would have to admit a certain reticence in action. Action exposes to the whole world what we truly believe. It is rather easy and unthreatening to make comments and address issues in the forum of debate, but the transfer of words to personal involvement is often complex and we hesitate in action. While words can be cheap, action is quite costly. It costs us time and effort; it may even cost us friends. Doing what is right simply because it is right must be the attitude we possess. As important as conviction is, such deep-seated belief holds little value unless we can support our words with effort and devotion to cause.
The philosophy of Martin Luther King, Jr., transformed a nation; the combination of words and action on our part can aid the conversion of society to a more God-centered understanding of the world. If we speak but demonstrate no complementary action, those who hear us will wonder at our own level of commitment and may question our conviction. If, however, we can demonstrate by what we do that we choose and act rightly simply because it is right and with no thought to personal gain, then our world will become a better place and the Kingdom of God on earth will be one step closer to reality.
Application Of The Parable To Contemporary Life
Sermon Openings
1. In a vast field that stretched as far as the eye could see, a great multitude of people milled about waiting for something to happen. Quite unexpectedly a messenger came into the midst of the people and announced, "You are to walk around this field 25 times carrying a baton." The people were a bit mystified by these words and asked, "What will happen when we finish?" "You will learn the answer when you are done," came the reply. So the crowd ambled off to make its first lap of the field. As they walked they passed the baton amongst themselves. It took almost a full day at a leisurely pace to walk around the field, but they eventually made the circuit of the field the first time. This feat called for a celebration.
As the crowd celebrated they decided, just for the heck of it, to make the next lap more interesting. They broke into teams to race against each other. The task would not be so boring and winners and losers could be determined. This would transform a mundane task into a fun-filled event. So the people separated themselves into five teams, the Reds, Yellows, Blacks, Browns, and Whites. There were some in the great multitude, however, who refused to join the teams. They called themselves "The Others" because they did something different than the teams. Strangely, it was The Others who were given the baton to carry, since the teams argued amongst themselves over which team should have it. The five teams, the Reds, Yellows, Blacks, Browns, and Whites, took their marks and then took off at breakneck speed. The Yellow team won the second lap. The teams decided after that second circuit of the field, just for the heck of it, that they would station various members of each team at select sites around the field. In this way no one would have to run the whole distance but rather each would run an individual segment of the whole. Thus, the relay race was invented. As the five teams raced around the field in relays, The Others simply continued on their way around the field. The teams thought The Others were "out of it."
The competition among the teams became more and more intense. Soon the racing teams realized that slow runners were a liability to the team's chances to win. They decided, therefore, that only the fast runners would compete. This, however, did not seem to satisfy those who were the best on each team, so it was decided, just for the heck of it, that each team would be represented by one individual and races would be held in measured distances. On one lap the representative of the Browns won and on another it was the Yellow team member who was victorious. Meanwhile, The Others continued to plod their way around the field, lap after lap after lap. When they completed all 25 laps they threw a party. When the messenger arrived in the midst of the celebration The Others asked, "You told us at the beginning that we would learn our reward when we finished. We have completed the 25 laps of the field. What will we get?" "Your reward," said the messenger, "is that you made it." The Others were stunned. "Is that all there is? We have made this long journey just to say we made it?" When The Others thought about their accomplishment, however, they had to agree that this was the reason they were celebrating -- because they had made it. "But what about the teams?" asked one of The Others, seeing that none of them were present. "The teams," said the messenger, "as you can see, didn't make it. And that's the heck of it!"1
Completing a task, making no attempt to gain personal glory, doing what is right simply because it is the right thing to do -- these are some of the important ideas brought to light by John Aurelio's thought-provoking story, "The Game." Today's parable of the two sons presents a similar message.
2. "Free at last, free at last -- thank God Almighty we are free at last." With these words Martin Luther King, Jr., ended his most famous speech. Given at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial on the Washington Mall in August 1963, it was the last event of the "March on Washington," the highpoint of the American civil rights movement. Martin Luther King, Jr., was its principal symbol and spokesman. Dr. King called the nation to reform, but he did it in a way which was new to American history. He advocated non-violence and civil disobedience, in line with some of the great thinkers of the past whom he had studied, including the great Indian freedom fighter Mahatma Gandhi and the American philosopher Henry David Thoreau. Dr. King said that the nation's system of racial segregation, which had been labeled the "Jim Crow" laws, had to cease. It could no longer be business as usual. As Abraham Lincoln a century earlier had told the nation it could not live half slave and half free, so Martin Luther King, Jr. said the nation could no longer live separate and unequal; racial segregation had to end.
Dr. King's campaign for civil rights began quite unexpectedly in December 1955 when Rosa Parks said she would not move to the back of a Montgomery city bus. The drive went to Greensboro, North Carolina, and Albany, Georgia. There was the "Freedom Ride" of 1961, the marches in Birmingham and Washington, and the voter registration drive in Mississippi and the protest march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. The campaign eventually arrived in Memphis, Tennessee, in April 1968 when Dr. King came to support a sanitation workers' strike. There he was assassinated at the tender age of 39. The night before he died, however, Dr. King gave another of his electrifying speeches, where he said, "I have been to the mountaintop and I've seen the other side." Martin Luther King, Jr., believed his cause to be right, that a new day was necessary in America, and that a highway of justice needed to be constructed for all people.
Martin Luther King, Jr., professed in word and action what he believed. He courageously challenged a reluctant nation to transform itself, to be converted to a belief in equality for all people, not only those who by tradition had been the culturally elite. Dr. King told America that it had the right to protest for right. In today's parable of the two sons, Jesus suggests that our actions must be consistent with our words, that we must do what is right because it is right.
Points Of Challenge And Questions To Ponder
1. Are we long on words but short on action? Do we feel comfortable giving our opinion or providing advice but refuse to back up our words with effort?
2. Are our actions consistent with our words or do we exhibit a Jekyll and Hyde division in our lives? Are people attracted to what we do or can they see through the exterior veneer that we present?
3. Are status, reward, name, and achievement important to us? Can we live our daily lives and desire no recompense for our efforts? Can we see the need to do what is right simply because it is the right thing to do?
4. If we observe inconsistency in what people say and do, are we willing to challenge the individual or do we let it slide? Can we take the initiative to call people to task for what they do?
5. Are we more concerned with what people think of us or the accomplishment of our tasks? Can we place attitudes towards others and desire for personal accomplishment to one side in order to complete the tasks life throws our way? Are we more interested in looks and appearance as compared with getting the job done?
Exegesis And Explanation Of The Parable
The parable of the two sons, exclusive to Matthew's Gospel, is the first of three parables addressed to the chief priests and elders of Israel that form a response to their challenge to Jesus' authority. The Jewish leaders want to know by what authority Jesus acts and speaks. In this pericope we see how Jesus demonstrates the failure of Israel in the past to recognize the authority of John the Baptist and others who have come in God's name. Their words have been significant and proper, but their actions have been inconsistent with what they preach. The parable is marked by simplicity and can be summarized in the familiar words of Saint James (1:22-25):
But be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceive themselves. For if any are hearers of the word and not doers, they are like those who look at themselves in a mirror; for they look at themselves and, on going away, immediately forget what they were like. But those who look into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and persevere, being not hearers who forget but doers who act -- they will be blessed in their doing.
The parable teaches that the person who refuses to do what is asked, but subsequently changes one's mind and does the task, is better than the one who promises to carry out obligations but never fulfills them. The contrast between verbal rebellion and ultimate obedience as opposed to verbal obedience and failure to act is clear. In other words, the parable of the two sons illustrates one aspect of the traditional adage, "Practice what you preach."
The parable of the two sons as it is presented in most contemporary translations of the Bible is different than many ancient manuscripts. The New English Bible, for example, follows Patristic texts which reverse the order of the two sons, with the second being the one who initially refused to go but eventually went to the vineyard to work. This alternative form reflects an allegorical interpretation of the parable from the ancient church. The Jews claimed to be obedient to God, but rejected the gospel. The Gentiles, coming on the scene later, refused to obey God, but repented and accepted the gospel. The Revised Standard Version of the pericope is preferred because in its ordering of the two sons the story is less contrived since the father only seeks help from the second son when the first refuses to go when he is asked.
Scholars disagree on the ultimate source of this parable. Some suggest that the passage has its roots in Jesus' own words, but the preponderance of opinion suggests that Matthew created the parable to illustrate his basic theme that God requires deeds rather than empty words. Use of the term "Kingdom of God" in this passage differs from the normal "Kingdom of Heaven" and suggests Matthew's hand in composition. The vocabulary and style of this passage are similar to other sections of the Gospel which have been attributed to Matthew's original hand. The parable presupposes the rejection of Jesus' authority on the part of Israel. This would only have been known by a writer like Matthew composing his Gospel after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. Certain difficulties in the parable also illustrate its probable origin with the evangelist. It is hardly likely that the chief priests and elders en masse were guilty of failing in their duties to God; most carried out the public duties appointed to them. Additionally, there is nothing to indicate that John the Baptist or Jesus managed to effect a mass conversion of tax collectors and prostitutes. Scholars believe Matthew used generic images to demonstrate his understanding of Jesus' message.
Certain biblical exegetes today suggest that the parable was presented by Matthew to distinguish Jesus' teaching from a contemporary Jewish story. In the latter, humility is the virtue that is stressed. Five people are asked to complete a task. The first four refuse because they are uncertain they can complete the assignment; the fifth accepts the task but does not perform it, laying himself open to the wrath of the king who assigned the work. Jesus' version of the story, as told by Matthew, brings infinitely more comfort in its demonstration that there truly are obedient disciples among those who would never claim to be. Jesus thus invites into his family and life those considered by the religious authorities of his day to be outsiders.
The parable proper (verses 28 to 31) uses the figure of two sons to represent two kinds of people. The religious leaders of the day who made formal professions of piety but failed to do what God required are contrasted with tax collectors and prostitutes who did not follow the law, but repented in response to preaching and were now keeping the commandments. The first son is the personification of tax collectors and prostitutes who are living sinful lives and have refused to do God's will. However, when John the Baptist came "proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4), these social and moral outcasts of society repented, believed, and thus by their actions gained access to the Kingdom of God. They did the will of the Father. The second son portrays the attitude of the religious leaders of Jesus' day. They do everything for others to see: "They do all their deeds to be seen by others; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long. They love to have the place of honor at banquets and the best seats in the synagogues, and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, and to have people call them rabbi" (Matthew 23:5-7). They do not practice what they preach. John came to show them the way of righteousness; they listened but refused to believe.
Jesus attacks those who believed themselves to be fulfilling the will of God but were not and commends those who felt excluded from Israel but were actually fulfilling the will of God. The parable presents harsh judgment upon those who say "yes" verbally and intellectually without seeing that the will of God is realized in their lives. In the parable this is demonstrated by the contrast between outward conformity on the one hand and actual work on the other. In other words, formal, legal, and ritual observance of God's requirements is contrasted with repentance which leads to true service of God and God's people. At the same time this passage is an urgent call to place into action what God directs in the Scripture. The parable thus contrasts the "devout" who rejected Jesus with those considered sinners who accepted him. Thus, tax collectors and prostitutes enter the Kingdom of God before the so-called "righteous." This is the miracle at which angels (Luke 15:7, 10) and God the Father (Luke 15:23-24) rejoice in heaven. In this way Jesus defines the requirement for entry into eternal life as doing the will of the Father. Access to God is not gained by professions of obedience that are not matched by actions.
Jesus, the great teacher, uses this parable to help people teach themselves about the real meaning and extent of their own religious ideas and to answer his questions. In asking "Which of the two did the will of his Father?" (21:31) the chief priests and elders of the Jews can no longer hide behind feigned ignorance. The Lord forces them to answer, even though they realize the parable describes them and their failures. Jesus wishes to teach Israel about its failure and to show the nation that it needs the instruction and example of Jesus. The Lord attacks not the refusal to obey God but the religious hierarchy's rejection of God's call to conversion.
Context Of The Parable
Context In The Church Year
The church places this parable in the third week of five consecutive Sundays that feature parables in Matthew's Gospel. The parable of the two sons, although in the center of the group, serves as the first of three pericopes specially designed to illustrate the authority of Jesus in his ministry. Challenged by the religious authorities of his day, Christ responds with an indictment of those very officials and exposes their failure to demonstrate properly by action the words they profess. In the last two Sundays we have heard about God's unlimited forgiveness and the triumph of compassion over justice. The church has shown the munificence and greatness of God's love for us; now it is time for us to respond and manifest by our actions what our words profess. As God first loved us, so we are now asked to love God and God's people, not only by what we say, but more especially by what we do.
Context With Other Gospels
Matthew drew from his private source to write the parable of the two sons. Although no other evangelist presents this pericope, commentators have discovered parallels to the basic themes of acting on God's word and conversion in both the Old and New Testaments. In the Hebrew Scriptures we learn of the need to obey the Word of God, heed the Lord's voice, and do God's will. Samuel tells Saul, "Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Surely, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams" (1 Samuel 15:22). Scripture scholars also see a parallel between the parable of the two sons and the story of Nathan and David in 2 Samuel chapter 12. In John's Gospel (15:14) Jesus instructs his disciples, "You are my friends if you do what I command you." Similarity is also present between this parable and the more famous story of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:11-32. Mark 12:1-12 presents the familiar theme of the Jews' rejection of God's prophets and their final rejection of God's son, resulting in Israel's replacement by others, namely the Gentiles.
Context With First And Second Lessons
First Lesson: Ezekiel 18:1-4, 25-32. Ezekiel's prophecy in chapter 18 describes a message quite similar to that illustrated by the parable of the two sons. The prophet speaks of conversion and the ultimate actions of people in turning to God. Transformation of one's life away from iniquity to righteousness is what Ezekiel suggests will preserve life. One may speak the right words, but if there is no conversion in the heart, then the hollowness of one's life is revealed. The prophet tells the people to repent, cast away all transgressions, and seek a new heart and spirit.
Ezekiel's words challenge us to complete the tasks of life simply because they are asked of us. What is important is to do the right thing, regardless of how others perceive us -- as saint or sinner. Actions are more important than any labels people may give us. To live in the sight of God requires that we carry out the precepts of the Lord.
Second Lesson: Philippians 2:1-13. The famous Christological hymn of Saint Paul in his Letter to the Philippians clearly demonstrates Jesus' understanding that actions speak louder than words. Jesus, the Son of God, came to us as a man; he emptied himself of divinity to take on the human condition. The Lord died an ignominious death on the cross to save us from our sins. Jesus did not have to save the world in this fashion; he chose to suffer and die. His actions were consistent with his words; he practiced what he preached. Jesus did what was right simply because it was right. He sought no glory and received none in this life, but his salvific death through obedience to the will of the Father made salvation possible for us. May we rejoice and be glad because of what God has done for us.
____________
1. Paraphrased from "The Game," in John R. Aurelio, Colors! Stories of the Kingdom (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993), pp. 81-84.
Theme
We have all heard the adage that actions speak louder than words. Today we are presented in the daily newspaper headlines with numerous incidents where the actions of people are inconsistent with the words they profess. We are also bombarded with the idea that reward must follow any action. Society tells us that tasks are not worth our effort unless there is a pot of gold or some other significant prize that awaits the completion of our effort. We who bear the name Christian must stand against this tide of rhetoric and reward and profess by action as well as word our faith in Jesus. Christians must be willing to do what is right because it is right. The reward in this life may at times be the cross of ridicule or rejection, but we can expect no better lot than the one we follow. Conversion to a life of action consistent with the ideas we express on our lips will one day bring us to God and eternal life.
Spiritual Food For The Journey
Martin Luther King, Jr., leader of the American civil rights movement from December 1955 until his assassination in April 1968, often echoed the conviction of Mahatma Gandhi, the great Indian freedom fighter, one generation earlier: "We have the right to protest for right." The civil rights movement in the United States demonstrated how a people long denied freedom and the inalienable rights guaranteed by the Declaration of Independence -- life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness -- were able to use nonviolent protest to change unjust laws and practices and transform the minds of many to a more equitable understanding of life. Dr. King firmly believed that his philosophy of nonviolence, derived from many sources in his educational development, would be effective if actions were consistent with words. When he electrified a crowd of some 200,000 people in August 1963 with his famous "I Have a Dream" speech during the March on Washington, King laid the groundwork for future years that would ultimately bring the end to "Jim Crow" and at least a beginning to the conversion of America's penchant toward racism.
We all know that actions do speak loudly, but most would have to admit a certain reticence in action. Action exposes to the whole world what we truly believe. It is rather easy and unthreatening to make comments and address issues in the forum of debate, but the transfer of words to personal involvement is often complex and we hesitate in action. While words can be cheap, action is quite costly. It costs us time and effort; it may even cost us friends. Doing what is right simply because it is right must be the attitude we possess. As important as conviction is, such deep-seated belief holds little value unless we can support our words with effort and devotion to cause.
The philosophy of Martin Luther King, Jr., transformed a nation; the combination of words and action on our part can aid the conversion of society to a more God-centered understanding of the world. If we speak but demonstrate no complementary action, those who hear us will wonder at our own level of commitment and may question our conviction. If, however, we can demonstrate by what we do that we choose and act rightly simply because it is right and with no thought to personal gain, then our world will become a better place and the Kingdom of God on earth will be one step closer to reality.
Application Of The Parable To Contemporary Life
Sermon Openings
1. In a vast field that stretched as far as the eye could see, a great multitude of people milled about waiting for something to happen. Quite unexpectedly a messenger came into the midst of the people and announced, "You are to walk around this field 25 times carrying a baton." The people were a bit mystified by these words and asked, "What will happen when we finish?" "You will learn the answer when you are done," came the reply. So the crowd ambled off to make its first lap of the field. As they walked they passed the baton amongst themselves. It took almost a full day at a leisurely pace to walk around the field, but they eventually made the circuit of the field the first time. This feat called for a celebration.
As the crowd celebrated they decided, just for the heck of it, to make the next lap more interesting. They broke into teams to race against each other. The task would not be so boring and winners and losers could be determined. This would transform a mundane task into a fun-filled event. So the people separated themselves into five teams, the Reds, Yellows, Blacks, Browns, and Whites. There were some in the great multitude, however, who refused to join the teams. They called themselves "The Others" because they did something different than the teams. Strangely, it was The Others who were given the baton to carry, since the teams argued amongst themselves over which team should have it. The five teams, the Reds, Yellows, Blacks, Browns, and Whites, took their marks and then took off at breakneck speed. The Yellow team won the second lap. The teams decided after that second circuit of the field, just for the heck of it, that they would station various members of each team at select sites around the field. In this way no one would have to run the whole distance but rather each would run an individual segment of the whole. Thus, the relay race was invented. As the five teams raced around the field in relays, The Others simply continued on their way around the field. The teams thought The Others were "out of it."
The competition among the teams became more and more intense. Soon the racing teams realized that slow runners were a liability to the team's chances to win. They decided, therefore, that only the fast runners would compete. This, however, did not seem to satisfy those who were the best on each team, so it was decided, just for the heck of it, that each team would be represented by one individual and races would be held in measured distances. On one lap the representative of the Browns won and on another it was the Yellow team member who was victorious. Meanwhile, The Others continued to plod their way around the field, lap after lap after lap. When they completed all 25 laps they threw a party. When the messenger arrived in the midst of the celebration The Others asked, "You told us at the beginning that we would learn our reward when we finished. We have completed the 25 laps of the field. What will we get?" "Your reward," said the messenger, "is that you made it." The Others were stunned. "Is that all there is? We have made this long journey just to say we made it?" When The Others thought about their accomplishment, however, they had to agree that this was the reason they were celebrating -- because they had made it. "But what about the teams?" asked one of The Others, seeing that none of them were present. "The teams," said the messenger, "as you can see, didn't make it. And that's the heck of it!"1
Completing a task, making no attempt to gain personal glory, doing what is right simply because it is the right thing to do -- these are some of the important ideas brought to light by John Aurelio's thought-provoking story, "The Game." Today's parable of the two sons presents a similar message.
2. "Free at last, free at last -- thank God Almighty we are free at last." With these words Martin Luther King, Jr., ended his most famous speech. Given at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial on the Washington Mall in August 1963, it was the last event of the "March on Washington," the highpoint of the American civil rights movement. Martin Luther King, Jr., was its principal symbol and spokesman. Dr. King called the nation to reform, but he did it in a way which was new to American history. He advocated non-violence and civil disobedience, in line with some of the great thinkers of the past whom he had studied, including the great Indian freedom fighter Mahatma Gandhi and the American philosopher Henry David Thoreau. Dr. King said that the nation's system of racial segregation, which had been labeled the "Jim Crow" laws, had to cease. It could no longer be business as usual. As Abraham Lincoln a century earlier had told the nation it could not live half slave and half free, so Martin Luther King, Jr. said the nation could no longer live separate and unequal; racial segregation had to end.
Dr. King's campaign for civil rights began quite unexpectedly in December 1955 when Rosa Parks said she would not move to the back of a Montgomery city bus. The drive went to Greensboro, North Carolina, and Albany, Georgia. There was the "Freedom Ride" of 1961, the marches in Birmingham and Washington, and the voter registration drive in Mississippi and the protest march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama. The campaign eventually arrived in Memphis, Tennessee, in April 1968 when Dr. King came to support a sanitation workers' strike. There he was assassinated at the tender age of 39. The night before he died, however, Dr. King gave another of his electrifying speeches, where he said, "I have been to the mountaintop and I've seen the other side." Martin Luther King, Jr., believed his cause to be right, that a new day was necessary in America, and that a highway of justice needed to be constructed for all people.
Martin Luther King, Jr., professed in word and action what he believed. He courageously challenged a reluctant nation to transform itself, to be converted to a belief in equality for all people, not only those who by tradition had been the culturally elite. Dr. King told America that it had the right to protest for right. In today's parable of the two sons, Jesus suggests that our actions must be consistent with our words, that we must do what is right because it is right.
Points Of Challenge And Questions To Ponder
1. Are we long on words but short on action? Do we feel comfortable giving our opinion or providing advice but refuse to back up our words with effort?
2. Are our actions consistent with our words or do we exhibit a Jekyll and Hyde division in our lives? Are people attracted to what we do or can they see through the exterior veneer that we present?
3. Are status, reward, name, and achievement important to us? Can we live our daily lives and desire no recompense for our efforts? Can we see the need to do what is right simply because it is the right thing to do?
4. If we observe inconsistency in what people say and do, are we willing to challenge the individual or do we let it slide? Can we take the initiative to call people to task for what they do?
5. Are we more concerned with what people think of us or the accomplishment of our tasks? Can we place attitudes towards others and desire for personal accomplishment to one side in order to complete the tasks life throws our way? Are we more interested in looks and appearance as compared with getting the job done?
Exegesis And Explanation Of The Parable
The parable of the two sons, exclusive to Matthew's Gospel, is the first of three parables addressed to the chief priests and elders of Israel that form a response to their challenge to Jesus' authority. The Jewish leaders want to know by what authority Jesus acts and speaks. In this pericope we see how Jesus demonstrates the failure of Israel in the past to recognize the authority of John the Baptist and others who have come in God's name. Their words have been significant and proper, but their actions have been inconsistent with what they preach. The parable is marked by simplicity and can be summarized in the familiar words of Saint James (1:22-25):
But be doers of the word, and not merely hearers who deceive themselves. For if any are hearers of the word and not doers, they are like those who look at themselves in a mirror; for they look at themselves and, on going away, immediately forget what they were like. But those who look into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and persevere, being not hearers who forget but doers who act -- they will be blessed in their doing.
The parable teaches that the person who refuses to do what is asked, but subsequently changes one's mind and does the task, is better than the one who promises to carry out obligations but never fulfills them. The contrast between verbal rebellion and ultimate obedience as opposed to verbal obedience and failure to act is clear. In other words, the parable of the two sons illustrates one aspect of the traditional adage, "Practice what you preach."
The parable of the two sons as it is presented in most contemporary translations of the Bible is different than many ancient manuscripts. The New English Bible, for example, follows Patristic texts which reverse the order of the two sons, with the second being the one who initially refused to go but eventually went to the vineyard to work. This alternative form reflects an allegorical interpretation of the parable from the ancient church. The Jews claimed to be obedient to God, but rejected the gospel. The Gentiles, coming on the scene later, refused to obey God, but repented and accepted the gospel. The Revised Standard Version of the pericope is preferred because in its ordering of the two sons the story is less contrived since the father only seeks help from the second son when the first refuses to go when he is asked.
Scholars disagree on the ultimate source of this parable. Some suggest that the passage has its roots in Jesus' own words, but the preponderance of opinion suggests that Matthew created the parable to illustrate his basic theme that God requires deeds rather than empty words. Use of the term "Kingdom of God" in this passage differs from the normal "Kingdom of Heaven" and suggests Matthew's hand in composition. The vocabulary and style of this passage are similar to other sections of the Gospel which have been attributed to Matthew's original hand. The parable presupposes the rejection of Jesus' authority on the part of Israel. This would only have been known by a writer like Matthew composing his Gospel after the death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus. Certain difficulties in the parable also illustrate its probable origin with the evangelist. It is hardly likely that the chief priests and elders en masse were guilty of failing in their duties to God; most carried out the public duties appointed to them. Additionally, there is nothing to indicate that John the Baptist or Jesus managed to effect a mass conversion of tax collectors and prostitutes. Scholars believe Matthew used generic images to demonstrate his understanding of Jesus' message.
Certain biblical exegetes today suggest that the parable was presented by Matthew to distinguish Jesus' teaching from a contemporary Jewish story. In the latter, humility is the virtue that is stressed. Five people are asked to complete a task. The first four refuse because they are uncertain they can complete the assignment; the fifth accepts the task but does not perform it, laying himself open to the wrath of the king who assigned the work. Jesus' version of the story, as told by Matthew, brings infinitely more comfort in its demonstration that there truly are obedient disciples among those who would never claim to be. Jesus thus invites into his family and life those considered by the religious authorities of his day to be outsiders.
The parable proper (verses 28 to 31) uses the figure of two sons to represent two kinds of people. The religious leaders of the day who made formal professions of piety but failed to do what God required are contrasted with tax collectors and prostitutes who did not follow the law, but repented in response to preaching and were now keeping the commandments. The first son is the personification of tax collectors and prostitutes who are living sinful lives and have refused to do God's will. However, when John the Baptist came "proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" (Mark 1:4), these social and moral outcasts of society repented, believed, and thus by their actions gained access to the Kingdom of God. They did the will of the Father. The second son portrays the attitude of the religious leaders of Jesus' day. They do everything for others to see: "They do all their deeds to be seen by others; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long. They love to have the place of honor at banquets and the best seats in the synagogues, and to be greeted with respect in the marketplaces, and to have people call them rabbi" (Matthew 23:5-7). They do not practice what they preach. John came to show them the way of righteousness; they listened but refused to believe.
Jesus attacks those who believed themselves to be fulfilling the will of God but were not and commends those who felt excluded from Israel but were actually fulfilling the will of God. The parable presents harsh judgment upon those who say "yes" verbally and intellectually without seeing that the will of God is realized in their lives. In the parable this is demonstrated by the contrast between outward conformity on the one hand and actual work on the other. In other words, formal, legal, and ritual observance of God's requirements is contrasted with repentance which leads to true service of God and God's people. At the same time this passage is an urgent call to place into action what God directs in the Scripture. The parable thus contrasts the "devout" who rejected Jesus with those considered sinners who accepted him. Thus, tax collectors and prostitutes enter the Kingdom of God before the so-called "righteous." This is the miracle at which angels (Luke 15:7, 10) and God the Father (Luke 15:23-24) rejoice in heaven. In this way Jesus defines the requirement for entry into eternal life as doing the will of the Father. Access to God is not gained by professions of obedience that are not matched by actions.
Jesus, the great teacher, uses this parable to help people teach themselves about the real meaning and extent of their own religious ideas and to answer his questions. In asking "Which of the two did the will of his Father?" (21:31) the chief priests and elders of the Jews can no longer hide behind feigned ignorance. The Lord forces them to answer, even though they realize the parable describes them and their failures. Jesus wishes to teach Israel about its failure and to show the nation that it needs the instruction and example of Jesus. The Lord attacks not the refusal to obey God but the religious hierarchy's rejection of God's call to conversion.
Context Of The Parable
Context In The Church Year
The church places this parable in the third week of five consecutive Sundays that feature parables in Matthew's Gospel. The parable of the two sons, although in the center of the group, serves as the first of three pericopes specially designed to illustrate the authority of Jesus in his ministry. Challenged by the religious authorities of his day, Christ responds with an indictment of those very officials and exposes their failure to demonstrate properly by action the words they profess. In the last two Sundays we have heard about God's unlimited forgiveness and the triumph of compassion over justice. The church has shown the munificence and greatness of God's love for us; now it is time for us to respond and manifest by our actions what our words profess. As God first loved us, so we are now asked to love God and God's people, not only by what we say, but more especially by what we do.
Context With Other Gospels
Matthew drew from his private source to write the parable of the two sons. Although no other evangelist presents this pericope, commentators have discovered parallels to the basic themes of acting on God's word and conversion in both the Old and New Testaments. In the Hebrew Scriptures we learn of the need to obey the Word of God, heed the Lord's voice, and do God's will. Samuel tells Saul, "Has the Lord as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Surely, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams" (1 Samuel 15:22). Scripture scholars also see a parallel between the parable of the two sons and the story of Nathan and David in 2 Samuel chapter 12. In John's Gospel (15:14) Jesus instructs his disciples, "You are my friends if you do what I command you." Similarity is also present between this parable and the more famous story of the Prodigal Son in Luke 15:11-32. Mark 12:1-12 presents the familiar theme of the Jews' rejection of God's prophets and their final rejection of God's son, resulting in Israel's replacement by others, namely the Gentiles.
Context With First And Second Lessons
First Lesson: Ezekiel 18:1-4, 25-32. Ezekiel's prophecy in chapter 18 describes a message quite similar to that illustrated by the parable of the two sons. The prophet speaks of conversion and the ultimate actions of people in turning to God. Transformation of one's life away from iniquity to righteousness is what Ezekiel suggests will preserve life. One may speak the right words, but if there is no conversion in the heart, then the hollowness of one's life is revealed. The prophet tells the people to repent, cast away all transgressions, and seek a new heart and spirit.
Ezekiel's words challenge us to complete the tasks of life simply because they are asked of us. What is important is to do the right thing, regardless of how others perceive us -- as saint or sinner. Actions are more important than any labels people may give us. To live in the sight of God requires that we carry out the precepts of the Lord.
Second Lesson: Philippians 2:1-13. The famous Christological hymn of Saint Paul in his Letter to the Philippians clearly demonstrates Jesus' understanding that actions speak louder than words. Jesus, the Son of God, came to us as a man; he emptied himself of divinity to take on the human condition. The Lord died an ignominious death on the cross to save us from our sins. Jesus did not have to save the world in this fashion; he chose to suffer and die. His actions were consistent with his words; he practiced what he preached. Jesus did what was right simply because it was right. He sought no glory and received none in this life, but his salvific death through obedience to the will of the Father made salvation possible for us. May we rejoice and be glad because of what God has done for us.
____________
1. Paraphrased from "The Game," in John R. Aurelio, Colors! Stories of the Kingdom (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 1993), pp. 81-84.
