Christ the King November 23, 2008

Hans Memling (c.1430–94) The Last Judgement (detail center panel, triptych).

Matthew 25:31-46

All three synoptic Gospels stress the point that Jesus began His ministry with a proclamation about the Kingdom of God.
“Kingdom talk” has fallen on hard times.  Language about the kingdom has become anachronistic &  irrelevant, carrying with it ideas that are hierarchal, patriarchal, exclusive, & imperialistic. The image of a “kingdom” has come to us with the baggage of the feudal lords of the middle ages & a conquering triumphalism in the name of Christ and the Church in such things as the crusades & the Inquisition.
We need to remember, however, that as Jesus used the concept of the Kingdom, or more precisely, the reign of God, it expressed God’s eternal desire for a mended creation, for a redeemed world, a time and place where all injustices would be rectified – put right.
But, what kind of king is Jesus?  Born in a cow stall, in a less than cosmopolitan center of civilization, to an even more less than regal set of parents; what kind of king to be executed as a common criminal outside the city gates on a garbage dump, buried in a borrowed tomb?
For Matthew, He is the Servant King & Judge.  Our passage is a vision of the Last Judgment.  And with this teaching Jesus concludes His public instruction, and Matthew wants this to be the lingering lesson in his listener’s ears.
The scene is an enthronement, the Son of Man being installed as King & Judge.  What comes as a surprise is the fact that the basis for the final judgment is one’s response to human need.  There are no questions about one’s theology or even one’s Church attendance, there is, however, the one question of what we have done for the “least of these”.
“For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me”.
“With deeds of love and mercy, the heavenly kingdom comes”. It is that kind of king that we are called to serve.  One that does not live inside marbled palaces commanding a militia of forces, but One who lives amidst those on the outside.

Proper 28A/Ordinary 33A/Pentecost +27 Nov 16, 2008

Matthew 25:14-30
Of all the parables, the point of this one seems to be so obvious that you could reduce it to a one-liner: God gives us talents and resources that we are to use, not bury.  Because what we don’t use, we lose.
But there’s a problem with traditional understandings of this parable which often interpret Jesus’ parables allegorically, so that the Master in this case symbolizes God.  What do we do with the third servant’s description of the Master:  “Master, I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you did not scatter seed”.
The master in this story is simply that and no more.  He was the head of one of the great households of the Middle East, which at the time were more than extended families, but above all, the source of concentrated wealth.  These were enterprises, trading houses, which gained most of their amassed wealth by foreclosing on small farmers or merchants.
The three servants in the story would be more like part of the household retinue, bureaucrats who helped manage the estate holdings.  The talents they were given might be seen as venture capital to invest for a profitable return to the master when he returned from his trip.  The servants would make a return on their investment, like the master, by taking advantage of the tenant share croppers, the day laborers, & the mom & pop merchants.
That’s why, when the master returned, he could say to the first two servants who had doubled his principle, “Well done, good and trustworthy servants”.
And that’s exactly why the third servant in this story turns out to be the protagonist.  He buried the talents, effectively & symbolically taking the master’s money out of circulation.  Now this servant’s words begin to make sense.  “Master, I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow and gathering where you did not scatter seed”. The third servant, who at one time was part of the system of oppression, no longer is going to use & manipulate the working poor just to make a profit for the sake of the master.
On this level the parable says: the Reign of God is breaking in where people no longer manipulate others for their own gain, nor use the labor of others for profit, for the sake of the CEO’s salary or shareholder value. There’s a time to take that kind of oppression out of circulation.  There’s a time not to bury one’s sense of justice and God’s righteousness.

Proper 27A/Ordinary 32A/Pentecost +26 Nov. 9, 2008

Matthew 25:1-13
Whatever the situation behind the parable of the “wise & foolish virgins,” it’s a story with disturbing implications.  We need to remember that Matthew is presenting to his church & to us, a picture of what the Church looks like.
The dynamic implication that Jesus draws for us, is not so much that there are an equal amount of wise & foolish within the Church, but rather, that there are times when we individually are sometimes wise, but more often than not, foolish. We need to remember also, that in the Biblical world, wisdom & foolishness are not matters of intelligence, but are practical dimensions of our being aware of God’s presence in our lives & our intention to live according to God’s will.
There are times when we are wise & there are times when we are foolish.  There are times when we are aware & open to God’s will, when we translate that into our everyday living; & times when we’re foolish, insensitive & closed to God’s promptings, when we don’t translate our faith into action.
A second implication of the parable stems from the fact that it wasn’t the case that the five didn’t have the oil – the resources – it was that they didn’t bring enough for the situation. In effect, what the parable is saying at this level is that if we are not prepared for more than what is average &  predictable, then we’re the foolish ones. Too often we hold back on our resources.  We’ll bring or invest only that which is necessary for “just getting by”.
Too often, the parable says, we live minimal existences, we live at a maintenance level, just trying to keep the status quo, especially in our relationships with others – we’ll give or invest just what we think is necessary to get by.  It’s not surprising, therefore, that only when its too late do we realize what we should have said but didn’t, what we should have done but didn’t. The love we should have expressed to a spouse, the time we should have spent with our children. We learn too late, just like the five foolish maidens, that we can’t borrow someone else’s time to spend with our families; nor can we, at the last hour, purchase the love we should have given.