[Ezekiel here responds to the objection that God is unjust because he rewards us or punishes us according to our individual actions instead of allowing one to rely on the institution of Israel and the promises made to the nation. Besides, the Jews in exile, whom Ezekiel was addressing, were blaming others for what had gone wrong. (eg 14:12-23) ; Ezekiel points out to them that we cannot hide behind the goodness or evil of others for what had gone wrong; each of stands before God in one’s own goodness and one’s own badness and is judges accordingly.]
The word of the Lord was addressed to me as follows: You object, What the Lord does is unjust. Listen, you House of Israel: is what I do unjust? Is it not what you do that is unjust? When the upright man renounces his integrity to commit sin and dies because of this, he dies because of the evil that he himself has committed. When the sinner renounces sin to become law-abiding and honest, he deserves to live. He has chosen to renounce all his previous sins; he shall certainly live; he shall not die.
[Paul was afraid of petty jealousies at work among the Philippians and he advises them to model themselves on Christ]s
If our life in Christ means anything to you, if love can persuade at all, or the Spirit that we have in common, or any tenderness and sympathy, then be united in your convictions and united in your love, with a common purpose and a common mind. That is the one thing which would make me completely happy. There must be no competition among you, no conceit; but everybody is to be self-effacing. Always consider the other person to be better than yourself, so that nobody thinks of his own interests first but everybody thinks of other people's interests instead. In your minds you must be the same as Christ Jesus:
His state was divine, yet he did not cling to his equality with God
but emptied himself to assume the condition of a slave, and became as men are;
and being as all men are, he was humbler yet, even to accepting death,
death on a cross.
But God raised him high and gave him the name which is above all other names
so that all beings in the heavens, on earth and in the underworld,
should bend the knee at the name of Jesus and that every tongue should acclaim
Jesus Christ as Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
[W J 1Harrington OP on Mt 21:28-32 “The vineyard stands for Israel, God’s chosen people and the contrast is made between the seemingly obedient sons of the father, the ‘righteous’ and those whom Jesus’ hearers regarded with contempt. On the face of it they refuse what is required of them because they do not keep the law, but they in fact please God more by their openness and love. The point of the parable is that the leaders of the Jews who have promised to work for God, but failed to do so, will be rejected. Others who have said ‘No’ to God at first (the tax collectors and prostitutes for example) but have afterwards repented and done his will, are received into God’s kingdom. The reaction of the first son is a key factor in the parable: ‘he changed his mind’ - thought better of his initial refusal. What we profess to believe has no value if it is not translated into active obedience. This warning is addressed to ‘religious’ people of every age.”]
Jesus said to the chief priests and the elders of the people, 'What is your opinion? A man had two sons. He went and said to the first, "My boy, you go and work in the vineyard today." He answered, "I will not go", but afterwards thought better of it and went. The man then went and said the same thing to the second who answered, "Certainly, sir", but did not go. Which of the two did the father's will?' 'The first' they said. Jesus said to them, 'I tell you solemnly, tax collectors and prostitutes are making their way into the kingdom of God before you. For John came to you, a pattern of true righteousness, but you did not believe him, and yet the tax collectors and prostitutes did. Even after seeing that, you refused to think better of it and believe in him.'
A
1. What word or phrase stands out for you? Why?
2. With whom in the readings do you most identify? Why
3. Do you feel attracted to anything in today�s readings? Do you feel
resistant to anything? Do you know why?
4. In what way do these readings affirm you?
5. In what way do these readings challenge you?
6. What can you do to respond to this challenge?
B
1.Do any of the readings, passages relate to your life, speak to you? How?
2.Any point you would like to raise?
3.Why did Matthew include this parable in his Gospel - what message does it have for his community?
4.What message does it have for us?
5.Relate an experience when you were given a second chance.
6.When have you had a change of heart?
7.Describe an event that made you change your behaviour or attitude.
8.What message do you take home from today’s readings?
*** Note the target is not the Jewish people as a whole but rather the leaders.
[ Vatican 2 document Nostra Aetate: “True, the Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ (cf. Jn 19:6); still, what happened in his passion cannot be charged against all the Jews without distinction then alive, nor against the Jews of today. Although the Church is the new People of God, the Jews should not be presented as rejected or accursed by God, as if this followed from the Holy Scriptures. All should see to it, then, that in catechetical work or in the preaching of the Word of God they do not teach anything that does not conform to the truth of the Gospel and the spirit of Christ.”]
Some notes taken from Daniel Harrington SJ – Scripture scholar
Chief priests and elders constituted the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem, with the Temple as its symbolic centre. They worked alongside the Roman officials and Herod Antipas to maintain the peace and security of the people. John’s movement (John the Baptist) posed for them not only a religious threat (because it was not Temple centred) but also a political threat (because it promised to get out of hand). So they would have been slow to approve John’s baptism as coming ‘from heaven’ (because it would harm their relations with the Romans or Herod Antipas) (The whole setting is Mt 21:23-32, which begins with question on John the Baptist)
From Matthew 21:23-22:46 there follows five controversies and three parables.
In the first controversy (21:23-27) and first parable (21:28-32) the chief priests and elders are criticised. Those Jews who worked with the Romans to preserve the status quo were afraid to render a public judgement on John the Baptist. Even the tax collectors and sinners - groups especially despised for collaborating with the Romans - were more admirable than the chief priests and elders.
The Jewish leaders are compared to the son who said “yes” to the father but failed to carry through by practising their principles.
These passages emphasise the heavenly origin of the ministry of both John and Jesus and the effect they had on some surprising (marginal) people. We are also moving towards a systematic critique of the Jewish leaders of Jesus’ (and Matthew’s own) day.]
For the next three weeks our tour through Matthew’s storehouse of things old and new (Mt. 13:52) pauses at three parables, often called “Matthew’s Debate With the Synagogue Across the Street.” They are told amid the mounting opposition to Jesus during his final days in Jerusalem, but are strongly influenced by the struggle for Jewish identity between the emerging Christian group and the nascent rabbinic movement after the destruction of the Temple (70 A.D.).
Stories of two sons are a staple of Jewish tradition (e.g., Esau and Jacob) and of the teaching of Jesus (see Lk. 15:11-32). In Jesus’ story, a man orders one of his sons to work in the vineyard; he says “I will not,” but has a change of heart and goes to work. The other son immediately says yes but never ends up in the vineyard. The parable leaves us wondering what the father would do and what happens to the deceptive son. But Jesus interrupts with a question: “Which of the two did the father’s will?” His adversaries, the chief priests and elders, are trapped, as David had been by Nathan’s parable (2 Sam. 12:5). They must answer “the first.” Then Jesus hammers home the application, that while notorious sinners (originally naysayers to God’s commands) repented when they heard the teaching of John, the religious establishment did not, even when they saw the conversion of the tax collectors and prostitutes.
Matthew is not simply bashing Jewish leaders of Jesus’ time; he is warning his own community. One indication of this is the question, “Which of the two did his father’s will?” The expression “will of the father” occurs elsewhere in Matthew, always in the context of Jesus’ instruction of disciples (6:10, 7:21, 12:50, 18:14); and Jesus’ own prayer is that he do the Father’s will (26:42). The parable contrasts a son who says, “Yes, sir” (Gk. kyrie) with the one who actually does the Father’s will. At the conclusion of the Sermon on the Mount, this attitude distinguishes between true and false disciples: “Not everyone who says to me Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven” (7:21). Jesus goes on to say that neither charismatic power nor correct theology is enough without bearing fruit or doing God’s will.
Matthew’s community is to imitate the “good son.” It too is composed of people who, like Peter, said no—perhaps by denying Christ at times of persecution—but who turned and were transformed by God’s grace. Matthew’s community is not the heir of powerful religious leaders who prided themselves on their honorific titles and stunning interpretations of Torah (the Law), but of tax collectors (parade members of occupations forbidden to observant Jews) and women so oppressed that they sell their very selves. It is people like these who say yes and become “doers” of God’s will.
The second reading provides the Christological foundation of such conversion. Jesus himself is the truly obedient son, who says yes to his Father in the most radical way. The initial verses of the hymn explode with verbs of “doing.” Jesus did not grasp at equality with God; he emptied himself; he took on the form of a slave; he came in human likeness; he was obedient to the point of enduring a criminal’s death. The verbs then shift. God is now the “doer,” exalting him and giving him a name above every name, the name of the vineyard owner in Matthew (kyrios=Lord). This is the attitude of Christ Jesus that true followers of Jesus are to adopt.
Matthew’s application of the parable to his community has special power today. Both perennial and recent problems summon the church to a depth of integrity that is expressed in deeds, not fine words. The church is also always a community of forgiven sinners, even as today “unforgivable sins” seem to mount. The recent charter of the U.S. bishops against sexual abuse, while filled with genuine concern for God’s little ones, was a necessary but long-delayed response to a pervasive scandal. It was quickly followed by a pogrom against priests, many aged and many no longer a threat to young people. How will this be reconciled with the picture of Jesus, the good son, who not only warned against scandalizing the little ones (Mt. 18:1-9), but was also called “a drunkard and glutton, a friend of tax collectors and sinners” (Mt. 11:19)?
• Pray about times when you have said yes to God’s call, only to falter when carrying it out.
• Recall times when your initial no was transformed into a new way of following Christ.
• Consider Paul’s exhortation to his community not to look to their own interests but to the good of others (Phil. 2:4).