Matthew 20:1-16
A. INTRODUCTION
Over the years, our country has done much to improve conditions regarding paid employment.
Working conditions have come forward in leaps and bounds. The hours people work have, generally, reduced—taking more seriously the need for rest. And the tools that we work with have improved out of sight.
Work has become more efficient, and less taxing physically. And there are now standards to protect employees regarding a number of issues, including working in excessive heat, and extreme cold.
Work safety has become a vital consideration. Indeed, we now have a variety of protective equipment and clothing. And people receive training to protect themselves and their fellow colleagues from physical harm.
And the amount that people get paid is more in line with everyday expenses. And is subject to constant review.
Of course, all this hasn’t come easily. Some of these benefits have been the result of bitter disputes over the years: between employers, employees, governments, trade unions, and other concerned people. And, of course, we may be in for some more bitter disputes as employment and federal government’s laws continually change.
But generally, we now live in a society where the idea of a fair day’s pay, for a fair day’s work reigns.
B. PARABLE OF THE WORKERS IN THE VINEYARD
1. Introduction
Imagine what it was like in Jesus’s time then. Because in those days there was very high unemployment.
Of course, for those who belonged to a household—such as slaves and hired servants—they had the security of membership in a household unit. However, agricultural labourers—working for a daily wage—had nothing of the sort. If they wanted work, they had to be at the marketplace early to have a chance to be picked for a job. But they also knew that an employer could literally dictate the terms under which they worked, and they had no say in it whatsoever.
However generally, if they were picked for a job, they worked a twelve-hour day. The standard pay was a denarius a day. They worked in all conditions: through heat and cold. There was no trade union movement to protect them. And, what’s more there was no Social Security system to fall back on. And if you didn’t work, you simply didn’t have enough money to survive.
So, perhaps, there couldn’t be a greater contrast between today’s world and that of Jesus’s—between our culture and the culture of first century Palestine.
However, as the parable that Jesus told the disciples, shows, maybe we shouldn’t pat ourselves on the back just yet. Because regarding employment, we still have a long way to go.
2. The Initial Hire (1-2)
Now the story begins with a vineyard owner who needed some workers to work in his vines. The grapes were ripe, and, in that climate, he knew they wouldn’t last long on the vine. And so he went down to the marketplace to pick some workers.
And he went early, and probably for two reasons. Firstly, because he probably wasn’t going to be the only employer looking for workers, and he wanted to make sure that he got his fair pick of the bunch. But secondly, he probably wanted to make sure that he was going to get a full day’s work, a full twelve hours, out of those that he hired.
And as it happened, he had little difficulty in getting the men. They agreed on the standard rate of pay. And they were sent off to the vineyard to start work. All very normal practice for the time.
3. Additional Labourers (3-5)
Now whether he couldn’t get all the workers he needed or, more likely, as the day progressed, he recognised that he needed more workers, so the work could be completed more quickly, the vineyard owner went back to the marketplace about 9 am, midday, and even at 3pm to hire some more workers. And each time, at the market place, he saw potential workers standing in the market place looking for work. And each time he hired more. But he specified no specific wage to those who weren’t working the full twelve hours, only that he would pay them whatever was right.
4. The Last-Minute Rush (6-7)
Come, about 5 o’clock then—and with only an hour left before the end of the working day, and perhaps out of concern that he desperately wanted to complete his grape harvest even at that late stage—the vineyard owner returned one last time to the market place for more workers.
But this time there was no agreement on a set pay, unlike the first lot of workers. And there was no assurance given that they would get a proportion of a day’s pay, like he had with the second (and subsequent) lots. In fact, there was no discussion about pay at all. Only a questioning of why they had been idle all day. (Was there something wrong with them? Why hadn’t they been previously hired?) But the reason was simple: no one had hired them. And so he sent them off to the vineyard to work too.
5. Comment
Now up to this point there was nothing irregular in regard to the practice of hiring the workers. For sure the hiring of additional workers at 9 am, noon, 3pm, and even 5pm was a little unusual. But if the vineyard owner had been concerned to get the job done and completed in the day, the constant monitoring of the workers’ progress, and the realisation that more workers would be required, was a practice that would not have been unknown.
6. Pay Time (8-10)
What was highly unusual though, was what came next. Because when the working day came to an end, the owner summoned his manager and told him to pay the workers. And to pay the last to be put on first.
Now remember, that a denarius—one full day’s pay—would be enough to provide the basics—food and clothing—for each employee and his family. Anything less than that would not be enough for survival.
Can you imagine the surprise and delight of the workers who had waited at the market place for eleven hours for work and who only had worked one hour, and yet they were given a full day’s pay? They had made no bargain with the vineyard owner. They had been made to trust the owner to do what was right. And the owner had come up with the goods.
In fact, he came up with more than the goods. Because the fact that they were given a full day’s pay, probably says much about the compassion of the vineyard owner and his genuine concern for the needs of others. He would have known that a poor man and his dependants needed a full day’s pay if they were to have the necessities of life. And, out of compassion, he acted accordingly.
Now, nothing in the story is said about those who came at the intermediate times, 9 am, at noon, and at 3pm. But we are left to assume that the owner would have done the right thing by them too—that they too got a full day’s pay. Which would again see the vineyard owner as acknowledging that anything less than a full day’s pay was not enough.
However, the story then moves finally to the men who had worked all day.
Now up to this point, they would have been spectators of the vineyard owner’s generosity. And forgetting that they had made a formal agreement with the owner, they expected that they would receive more than those who had been paid before them. They had worked longer hours—they’d done more work—so logic told them that they deserved more pay. But it didn’t work out like that. They received the denarius that they’d agreed to—the same amount that everyone else got—and no more.
7. The Jealous Workers (11-12)
Of course, receiving their pay under those circumstances was not a matter of rejoicing. They felt they had not been treated fairly—and they complained. The latecomers had done far less work but had been paid the same. Some of the latecomers had not had to work in the heat of the day but they had. They were jealous of what had been given to the others. And they envied the generosity of the owner to those who had worked only part of the day.
8. No Injustice (13-16)
But their argument did not impress the owner. And addressing one of the members of the group in particular (and showing no malice or hard feeling towards that worker) he pointed out that indeed there had been no injustice. There had been a solemn agreement with the full day worker’s regarding pay and conditions. And the owner had kept his side of the bargain.
The fact that he chose to be generous to other people did not give these men any more rights. Their discontent was due to envy, not because their rights were overlooked. And he told them to take what they had earned and be off. If he chose to be generous to those without enough, it did not mean that he was compelled to give more to those who had sufficient.
9. Comment
As you can see, then, in addition to the contrast between the normal regular employment practices of today, and those in place in Palestine in Jesus’s time, there’s quite a contrast again between the current general practice of paying award rates of pay, and the generosity of the vineyard owner to those who don’t have enough. After all, can you imagine many employers today who would pay a full day’s pay to a poor person, because they need the money, even if they only do an hour or two’s work?
C. IMPLICATIONS
Now, while I don’t expect the practice of generosity to be taken up by many of today’s employers, there are a number of points regarding this story that I think are worth noting.
1. What We Should Be Like
First of all, it tells us what we should be like—people of compassion. And it gives us a goal to work towards.
Now, without doubt, the employer in the story is meant to denote the character of God. And it is God’s generosity that transcends all human ideas of fairness. No one receives less than they deserve, but some receive far, far more.
The employer’s action in taking on additional workers—whose productivity could not possibly match the wage they were paid—may be understood as the behaviour of a big-hearted man who was compassionate and full of sympathy with the poor. And that is a character we would do well to emulate. Indeed, Jesus himself spent much time with the poor, the downtrodden, those who were looked down on, and those who generally were living on the knife-edge of survival.
One of the lessons of this story therefore is that we should be more like God in our thinking. We should follow the example of God, the vineyard owner, and Jesus himself, by taking, as a priority, compassion to those who have very little, who struggle to survive, and who need help simply with day-to-day living.
2. What We Shouldn’t Be Like
The second point is that it also illustrates what we shouldn’t be like: self-centred. And it illustrates a way of life we need to ger rid of in our systems.
Now, the workers who worked all day represent normal everyday people. But people whose focus is not centred on compassion and understanding or the need to care for their fellow man, but, rather, with their own jealousy and greed—and with an emphasis on claiming what they expect is rightfully theirs.
If there is a natural tendency to be sympathetic to those in the story who complained—because they got only what they were due—the story of the parable illustrates that this is the result of a failure to share God’s values—and how greedy, loveless, and unmerciful people generally are.
The message of the parable is that instead of pointing to ourselves, we are to shrug off that self–centred approach, so that we can see the plight of others. We are not to focus on what we consider to be our rights and our expectations, the things that we want and expect for ourselves. Rather, our focus is to be on caring and providing for those worse off than us.
3. Being Recipients of God’s Grace
And the third point is the sobering reminder that, in a spiritual sense, we are all like those additional workers in the story. Because we are all recipients of God’s grace.
The part time workers, those who worked only part of the day—the ones who received the vineyard owner’s extraordinary generosity—are there to show that God gives not only what people merit but much, much more.
And isn’t that a good thing for us? Because whether we’ve been a Christian for a few years or all our lives, we are all dependent upon God to give us not just what we deserve but a whole lot more. Indeed, enough to give us a full and satisfying relationship with God, the benefit of having our sins wiped clean, and the gift of eternal life.
In God, none of us are better than anyone else, because of the things we have done. Because we all need to receive more than we deserve anyway.
Our approach to life, therefore, should be with humility. God’s standards are not those of strict reward for services rendered. But his standards are to give people what they need for eternal life, if they so choose, regardless of the fact that a person has been a Christian two years, twenty years or their whole lives.
D. CONCLUSION
Regarding employment in Australia, over the years our society has changed working conditions from a system where the employer dictated all the terms, to today’s idea of a fair days pay, for a fair day’s work. And in that, as a nation, we take some pride.
However, today’s gospel reminds us that even that is not good enough. It still doesn’t meet God’s standards. And it shows us that we need to raise the bar again: to show compassion and care for those who are well less off than ourselves, to provide the means to live regardless of the hours of work that are available.
This parable then has a physical and a spiritual component. It gives an example of God’s character to emulate. A character of generosity and care. It gives us a cameo of what to avoid—a cameo of selfishness and self-seeking. And it is a reminder of our own need of God’s generosity and grace. And our own need for God to give us more than we deserve or could possibly earn.
Posted: 2nd February 2023
© 2023, Brian A Curtis
www.brianacurtis.com.au
