Pentecost 23 A: How Do You Imagine God?
Dear Partner in Preaching,
Well that was fun! Our sharing and conversation via last week’s letter and comments, that is. Let’s do the same this week, and continue building a community of partners in preaching.
As to this week… Over the years I’ve learned a lot from marketing guru Seth Godin. And one of the things I’ve learned seems particularly apt in light of this week’s parable. Godin argues in his little book All Marketers Are Liars
This week’s parable is, I think, a great example of this. The great scholarly debate about this passage is whether or not we should treat the landowner as God. If so, then Matthew may again be urging his community to increased watchfulness; indeed, to a far more active faith that doesn’t sit back but takes risks for the sake of the Gospel. The problem, as others point out, is that this landowner doesn’t seem like much of a candidate to serve as an allegorical surrogate for God – with his dubious work ethic (“you do all the work and I take the profit”), cold-hearted approach to business, and violent response to what some would call prudent financial management in uncertain times.
I suspect, however, that many of these questions may be a bit beside the point. Because what strikes me is how deeply affected the third servant is by his perception of the landowner. We should note that there is no clue ahead of time about the character of the landowner. The first we hear about it is from the lips of the third servant: “Master, I knew that you were a harsh man, reaping where you did not sow, and gathering where you did not scatter seed.” Neither the first nor the second servant voices this concern or affirm this sentiment, and the landowner himself neither confirms nor calls this assessment into question either. Notice that the landowner’s retort is in the form of a question. We might therefore hear it as, “If you thought I was so awful, then why didn’t you choose another strategy?” The landowner’s response might be a case of a self-fulfilling prophecy, as he decides to act in just the way the third servant has characterized him.
And here’s the thing: I wonder how often this happens in our relationship with God. We imagine God primarily as an enforcer of rules, and we get hung up by the legalism of religion. We visualize God as stern and prone to punishment, and we come to believe that everything bad in our lives is punishment from God. We see God as arbitrary and capricious, and that’s what we experience, a fickle and unsympathetic God who meets our expectations.
On the other hand, when we view God primarily in terms of grace, we are surprised and uplifted by the numerous gifts and moments of grace we experience all around us. And when we imagine God to be a God of love, we find it far easier to experience God’s love in our own lives and to share it with others.
What you see, all too often, is just what you get. And so perhaps this parable is inviting us to examine closely the pictures of God I believe we each carry around inside of us. Might we, Dear Partner, therefore ask our people what they think about when they think of God? Is God gracious or stern, loving or judgmental, eager for peace or prone to violence. We can certainly ask these questions and invite people to voice their responses to each other or to you in the service. But there is value, I suspect, even in asking folks to ponder these questions in silence (and giving them a moment or two to do so!). We might further ask whether the picture they carry – often constructed unconsciously – matches the picture of the God we know in Jesus or may have been shaped by other persons and events in their lives.
This will be an easy exercise for some. But for others it may occasional difficult memories or surface uncomfortable emotions as we recognize that some of our pictures of God – and therefore of the world and even ourselves – are quite limiting and even damaging. Therefore I would also invite folks to approach you in the days and weeks ahead if they want to talk further.
For now, though, it may help to anchor this parable in its narrative context. Jesus tells this parable just days before he will give his life on the cross, not as a substitute or surrogate to be punished in our place, but rather as testimony to just how far God will go to communicate God’s love for us and all the world. Jesus has spent his life and ministry proclaiming God’s kingdom, feeding the hungry, healing and sick, offering forgiveness, and welcoming ALL who recognize their need into the loving embrace of God. And for that message he is crucified. That’s how much God wants us to know of God’s love. And just in case we miss or underestimate that message, God raises Jesus on the third day that we might know that life is stronger than death and love more powerful than hate.
That’s the God we proclaim, Dear Partner, and I pray that our people do not go the way of the “third servant,” but instead see, rejoice in, and live under the love and grace of the God we know in Jesus. Thanks very much for sharing this good news with your people. For some of them, your words of grace this week will make all the difference in the world.
Yours in Christ,
David
PS: Feel free to keep the conversation going in the comments. I found the discussion so helpful as I prepared my own sermon for this past Sunday!
Post image: “Teachings of Jesus: Parable of the talents.” Jan Luyken etching.
Pentecost 23A
Thanks David, I have found it profitable to consider the treasure that’s been entrusted to our care – the gospel, our salvation, the world and all that is in it. And then to consider how we might invest these treasures – work with them, use them in a way that is faithful. Gospel work never returns empty, investing the treasure given to us by God, joyfully will bring the words “well done good and faithful servant, enter the joy of your Master.”
Saying that the gospel is what we are entrusted with and challenged to “invest” is a good perspective except for one important point: God doesn’t divvy in partial measures to God’s people. All of us get all of the gospel message of grace. It is a good perspective, however that we need to use what God gives us, including our experiences of grace and our testimony.
I found it a helpful reminder that all those involved in the parable have a message for us, not just the obvious or main ones. Thanks.
I’m struggling to connect these ideas with the first reading from Zephaniah, which listeners will have just heard. This reading assures that God will punish the people, and “make a full, terrible end of all the inhabitants of the Earth.” What the heck are we supposed to do with that? What kind of image of God does that leave people with, because I fear it is the loudest in the readings this week, and I feel the need to address that before we can jump to God’s grace.
Pentecost 23A
First, thank you for the work you do on this site. It was a gift to have you as my preaching professor and now to read your work in a new setting.
One important point you make is about how we tend to view God through our own perceptions and not in reality. This is a struggle for me at times because of abuse in my background. But let me assure your readers, God is good, and in his grace he leads us beyond the hurts to view Him as the loving God He is. Our skewed perceptions are so much a part of how we think that we often do not realize it. As preachers it is our job to raise these issues. Thanks for your insight!
Diane
I have been thinking about the word talent, which means something very different than it did in Jesus’ time and in this parable. Talent in our own time is a gift, and one that takes a lot of work to develop and mature. Now I’m thinking about talent, still, but as a lens of how we see God and each other. The gifts we have are individual, but meant to be developed and shared for the benefit of the wider community. A musician needs an audience, an artist a viewer, etc. While we can enjoy our talent, our gift, in solitude, hearing words of appreciation can nurture the gift and the spirit. The third tenant in today’s parable reacted out of fear, and speaks honestly to the landowner, who then uses the tenant’s words against him. To respond to a previous comment, Zephaniah later on urges righteousness and humility, signs of grace also meant to be shared. Perhaps grace is the talent we’ve received, and in turn are expected to nurture, develop, and share, returning grace to God in worship and humble thanksgiving. Just some rambling thoughts early in the week.
If I am correct in my interpretation of the parable of the ten bridesmaids which proceeds this, then this parable teaches about the other way you can fall off the horse. The first parable teaches how we fall off the horse when we focus on how much we have and get so wrapped up in our talents and how much oil WE have in OUR lamps, that we miss that the bridegroom is coming. This second parable then teaches that we can also become trapped in the opposite (or fall off the horse in the other direction): we can paralyze ourselves in our fear of what is coming and then we do not do anything with the things that are given to us. And so, we are encouraged to take the middle road. (Luther would call it the royal road.) Do not get wrapped up in the importance of your possessions so that they become your God and you miss the bridegroom, but so too do not become neglectful of things for fear of God. (I think of Romans 6 and why we still do Good works-should we go on sinning? By no means! Because the Grace of God should inspire good works in us spontaneously and profusely!) The Good news then is this: we are encouraged to live! And life will come abundantly from God. God has commanded the work, but forbidden the worry. “The person who works and worries toils twice.” But we should instead lay our worry on Christ. For it is not up to us what judgement God will bring. And although none of us are capable of trusting in Christ, it is not something any of us can do, Christ is coming anyway and brings us to the kingdom. So how could you possibly do anything BUT live the new life that God gives? So then again, the Gospel is keeping awake, staying alive in Christ. That is, Christ will give us life (not our keeping awake- we will fall asleep on our own.) But we are waiting for Christ. And this is a good thing. For Christ brings life.
I’m grateful for your work each week, and for all the previous comments and insights to understanding this scripture. I’m veering in a different direction, but one that may be way off usual interpretation of this parable (maybe too far off?)
In reading another commentary about this parable that focused on entering into the “joy of your master,” I thought of Matthew 6:24: “No one can serve two masters; for a slave will either hate the one and love the other, or be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and wealth.”
Which master is being described in this parable? What does that master’s joy look like?
If a talent originally referred to a huge sum of money, and the master, who is described as a harsh man, promotes those who get more and throws out those who don’t, then this parable seems to be more of a commentary on the kingdom of this world, than about the kingdom of heaven.
We’re doing something different for Christ the King Sunday next week, so I am thinking about putting two parables in conversation with each other: this one and the next parable about the sheep and the goats. There’s an extreme contrast between the “master” of this parable and the “king” from the next parable, who is seen in the hungry and thirsty and imprisoned.
I see this parable describing what it looks like to serve wealth, and those who are cast out because they have not been able to do it, verses the next parable which describes what it is to serve God. The sheep are a part of God’s kingdom work in this world today, and live that out by caring for the ones who are cast out – by basically living life, as it is described in the beatitudes.
Goats are just as valuable and useful as sheep. I am pretty certain both Jesus and his audience would think that. So why do people interpret this as a separating out of good and evil? It is some accounting thing but both goats and sheep are assets. Always bothered me that parable.
Trustees discussed decision to spend $ on sound system when we do not have the entire cost in hand, over half but still not all. I feel like I am to be the voice of hope/faith that we can step out. If we wait until the investment is complete while the cost rises, when will we ever move forward? Handing out snack kits to folks who drive up in an expensive car–sometimes looks awfully foolish, but, again, we give in hope and faith that something God-like will happen.
Loving it around here, as we together navigate the potentially thorny terrain of Matt 25…so memorable the parables, yet so hard to preach– and to sing, as there ain’t a heckuuva lotta foolish bridesmaids/talent-squandering hymns out there. But back to the point: given the close proximity to Matt 26-28, I wonder about the connection between the buried talent and the buried Lord — as a kind of perverse inversion in this parable of the resurrected life, the resurrected talent is buried in order that it remain unchanged/preserved, whereas the resurrected Lord reveals resurrection life to be the life of utter transformation
I have no problem relating our understanding of Talent with Jesus’ understanding of Talanta…..(the etymology of the word is interesting and in some experts’ opinion, coming from this parable..) I am taken with the whole perception of God concept……as a stewardship theme that I will preach, it is necessary to realize our talents are gifts from God…..the productivity of those talents may well be based upon how we perceive the one who gave them to us….Thanks!
To Ian: If your church also is reading 1 Thessalonians 5:9-11 states the opposite of Zephaniah, that God destines us not for wrath but for salvation through Christ! If you put Zephaniah in perspective of the NT and story of Christ, God has done something about that judgment that changes the scenario. Also, I think these Thessalonian verses make a good case for the master in Matthew NOT being God – they describe God going to all lengths not to cast people (lazy, fearful, industrious, frugal or not) into outer darkness. My co-pastor (husband) made a great point at text study that the dialogue between master and 3rd servant echoes the conversations between the Jewish leaders and Jesus – who is on the path to the outer darkness (cross). Jesus gives new understanding to what is true and worthwhile “abundance”.
Thank you so much for this – I was prompted by your thoughts to go to John Wesley and grace, and The Spirit of Bondage and Adoption – the change from being in fear and under the law (and paralysed to the point of inaction- the third servant) to having the spirit of love, and being under grace. As always, a new insight into the readings and a great start to a sermon, especially now I’m preaching every week!
I’ve been thinking about the way we perceive God as a very helpful way to approach this. Then as I’ve thought more I was reminded of a question from one of our members in relation to the command to love God and love others. She asked, “How can you do this if you don’t love yourself?” Maybe that perception of God is closely related to the perception of self. For if we cannot see ourselves as worthy of God’s love then it would be easy to bury whatever talent we might possess.
I was caught, immediately, David, by your comment that some folks believe the landowner in the parable is the stand-in for God. Initially, I disagreed, entirely, and have to admit that I never thought the landowner was an allegory for God. However, when I look at the way in which the third servant feared and addressed the landowner, I changed my mind. I realized that that is exactly the way those who surrounded me growing up thought about God. The poor were poor because they were lazy and worthless. God was the enforcer, lurking around every corner. When I was a boy, anytime I broke something or hurt myself, I thought it was divine retribution. And when my home church burned to the ground when I was 14, well, let’s just say I remembered every paper wad I shot from the balcony!I am going to take your suggestion and think about the pictures of God that we all carry around with us. Yesterday, in a student Bible study I lead, one student was trying to imagine a very human Jesus, and wondered aloud if he would have been a dog or cat person. We decided he would have been a dog person, and how cool to have seen a first century equivalent of a white lab following him from town to town. Since my personality type used to match that of the third servant, I would have played it safe with the talent. I would like to think of a landowner who appreciated my guarding the money, but who would also challenge me to be creative in my stewardship the next time. My parents would not have responded that way, but I did with my own children, and I believe God does as well.
There is an interesting book out there called “Cat & Dog Theology”. It met the author a few months ago and had a lovely conversation with him. I also think that it will open up an understanding of how we view God in relationship with us as well.
This is so important about the image of God people carry as it certainly can be damaged. I think your explanation of this parable is very helpful David. The God of wrath is alienating. The point you brought out is how Jesus death and resurrection is about Gods’love, mercy and forgiveness, which is hard for the average reader to draw from the parable unless it’s unearthed as you’ve done. When I was studying at Bible College this image of God we carry kept coming up for me. I dealt with & resolved it by pondering the character of God; scriptures on judgement and wrath vs love and mercy. I decided the character of God was predominantly mercy, love, and forgiveness enacted in Jesus’ death/resurrection. This is the Good News worth preaching before ppl can understand judgement/wrath in a non-repellent context.
Something I noticed in the text this time around is that the first two slaves increase their talents by trading. That is to say, they have to let go of the original coins entrusted to them before anything can grow. Building on the idea of the parable speaking to our images of God, how many Christians see God as one who primarily wants us to play it safe and to preserve the tradition? Now, I’m definitely a traditionalist, but what if the church’s primary role is not keeping the tradition (even by burying it, if need be), but if instead the church is called to give up some of its treasures so that the Kingdom can grow? What great and valuable gifts entrusted to us by past generations might our congregations need to “trade” in order that even more people will hear and live in the good news? What might we need to give up/empty ourselves of so that all people can live in God’s abundance? What would be the consequence if we fail even to try? Maybe the promise is that the times we dare to risk everything are the times when, by the grace of God, we gain the most.
Thanks for sharing this insight, Jennie. This definitely will preach in my context!
Thank you for these words. You’ve captured just what I’ve been thinking all week, and helped me find a way to bring this good news to my community.
This is a rather interesting take, Jennie. Thanks for this!!
After looking at the ‘Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels’ by Malina and Rohrbaugh I wonder about the notion of limited good and how we are to make sense of what ‘increasing’ our wealth means in the Biblical context? If gain for me means loss for you, then does it change how we see the action of the two successful/blessed slaves?
In a similar vein, as I’ve been thinking about the 3rd servant’s perception of the man, I’m reminded of the Dwarves in The Last Battle, the final story in the Narnia Chronicles. As the characters of this story find themselves in paradise, they discover that a group of Dwarves are unable to perceive their true surroundings and insist on believing that they are in a prison. The final chapters of The Last Battle are basically Lewis’s retelling of Matthew 25, and I have been thinking about that setting a lot in recent weeks.
I find it interesting how we have turned the words “talents” into an individualistic word. As I read Matthew I see Jesus speaking to the community, and the writer of Matthew gearing up for a highly communal experience. Wouldn’t it be helpful for us to read this communally instead of individually? How would it change our context? As I see it, it would allow us to focus on the need for boldness in our mission together. Certainly this is law not gospel, but it would be a law that we might hope that more of our churches would get zealous about. How great could this text be as one for a council to ponder at a retreat as they consider their focus for the coming year.
I appreciate David’s naming that the third servant seemed to have a fearful image of the Master. To me, this seems justified, based on the end of the parable.
If you can stomach the language check out “the speech” from the film adaptation of David Mamet’s Pulitzer-prize and Tony-award winning play, Glengarry Glen Ross. http://vimeo.com/64121060 For me, Alec Baldwin is the Master, publicly shaming those who do not produce. At the end, in order to further the humiliation, the “good sales leads” are given to the highest producer. “For to all those who have, more will be given, and they will have an abundance; but from those who have nothing, even what they have will be taken away.” How can this be God?
It can’t. But maybe the third servant is already “out there” in the darkness by his understanding of the Master/God. I am wondering if the crux here is whether God’s grace/talent is prevenient or irresistible? I don’t mean to be dogmatic about it but maybe it sheds light on a conundrum? When does God’s love end my feeling unlovable?
I’m taken by the “fear factor” in this parable. Maybe its not what this third servant does with his talent that’s the issue. Maybe the issue is what he does with his fear. His fear is a given. But he responds by letting it paralyze him instead of mobilize him to take even a modest risk. Does this speak to our conregations and their fear for the future of the church? Is that fear a given too for most of our communities? And are we “using” that fear by letting it paralyze us into inactivity? Instead, can we “use” that fear to drive us to the transforming word of God’s promise and respond with even modest and safe experiments in missional living, trusting God to keep God’s word about the future?
Very much appreciate this insight. Thank you. Fear seems a constant companion for many.
Eric, I’m taking this same approach with my sermon. Is fear preventing us from investing our time, talents, and treasure, into mission? Why maintaining the status quo isn’t enough.
On the other hand, William Herzog II suggests (in “Parables as Subversive Speech”) that the third servant is a whistle blower, bringing into light the financial abuse of the boss and the complicity of the other two servants. Seen from the perspective of the peasant and the limited goods economy this makes sense. Herzog suggests that the whistle blower, while uplifted by the peasants is not welcome by them due to his past associations…thereby he is an outsider everywhere. It would be easier to preach the traditional stewardship slant but it still leaves us with an angry master. Perhaps the third servant is the Christ figure, refusing to play the economic games….
Thank you! Your insight will help me preach. In bible study this week with our people, the first thing one woman exclaimed of the landowner was, “What a shyster! He thinks he’s all that and a bag of chips coming back and expecting not only what he left the slaves to care for but that they made him richer in the meantime. That can’t be God.” She made me laugh out loud in her honesty.
As we were coming to the end of our weekly Bible study on “next Sunday’s text,” a parishioner raised the question that had been bothering her since the five bridesmaids got shut out last week: “How is it that those who had some oil, and this one who has one talent, end up on the outside? It seems that they have some faith, but not enough, and that doesn’t seem fair!” I am wrestling with this whole “outer darkness” ending, and having a hard time getting it to mesh with any idea of grace. Because judgment is a sure thing, and we often try to avoid talking about it, but there it is. Not. Comfortable.
“
I like to remind the congregation that this parable is not the only description and vision that we have of God. We cannot isolate one passage or parable and limit the relationship God has with us as we try to apply it. Scripture must be taken as a whole and there are so many other passages that give us a balance of the God of love and grace (Gospel) interwoven with the God who holds us accountable as in this passage (Law). We need both.
Jo Anne… I have wrestled with the 10 virgins and did not come up with what I perceive now until after my sermon. I am seeing them as the church local where wheat and weeds grow together until the harvest. The wise could not give the oil to the foolish because they simply are not able to… if the light is the Gospel power that shines in the world then the oil would be the grace, forgiveness, and salvation that comes only from one source. In that way one could walk and talk and look like a Christian but if the fuel for you lamp is not the love of God pouring through you to others than the works done, as good as they may be, will burn out in the end. Just a thought.
Thanks David. Re: the perception of the third man. I just read another internet article about a new category called the “Dones” – people who are done with the church. They consider themselves still Christian, still faithful, but have had enough of the perceived demands and judgement of the church on their lives. I can’t help think that if these people, every week, were benefiting from a preacher struggling to hear the Good News of God’s love at every turn they might still be in community. Not saying the gospel doesn’t have its cutting edge, only that grace/love/welcome should always be the final word.
Thank you for this.