Last Come, First Served!
LAST COME, FIRST SERVED!
MATTHEW 20:1-16
Is the landowner mean to the early birds or generous to the latecomers, and has he a right to do as he pleases?
This parable may be placed here because it illustrates another aspect of the principle that the “first will be last, and the last first” (19:30; cf. 20:16). Its details reflect the high unemployment resulting from the desperate economic state of Palestine in New Testament times. At harvest or (as here) vintage time there was always a large pool of potential casual labor. The work began immediately after sunrise; the third, sixth, ninth and eleventh hours (20:3-6) were about 9 a.m., 12 noon, 3 and 5 p.m.; the wages were paid (20:8) when work ceased at sunset (about 6 p.m.). The fact that a denarius (a silver Roman coin roughly equivalent to 5p or a dime) was the daily wage for a casual laborer illuminates other references to money in the Gospels. We can readily understand the heightened hopes and consequent disappointment of those who had toiled for twelve hours, enduring “the burden of the day and the scorching heat”—language bound to excite the sympathy of all who have had experience of unshaded noonday in a Palestinian summer.
If the story had been told for its own sake, its moral might be that the men who, through no fault of their own, had been idle for the greater part of the day, required a living wage to support themselves and their families as much as the others did: “to each according to his need” (cf. John Ruskin, Unto This Last). But it is introduced as a parable of “the kingdom of heaven”; what is the point of comparison? Since it is not explicitly stated, we cannot be sure. The complaint of 20:11f. might remind us of the scribes and Pharisees, who disapproved of Jesus’ proclamation of pardon and acceptance to doubtful characters whose record of righteous achievement bore no comparison with theirs. But perhaps the lesson was intended more particularly for the disciples, lest they should claim special merit for having “left everything” to follow Jesus (19:27) and object to sharing the rewards of the kingdom with others whose commitment appeared to be neither so continuous nor so unreserved. In any case, the chief emphasis of the parable is laid on the householder’s generosity. Those hired at daybreak had agreed to accept a denarius as their wage; those hired later agreed to be paid at his discretion (20:4). “It is fortunate for most of us that God does not deal with us on the basis of strict justice and sound economics. … God’s love cannot be portioned out in quantities nicely adjusted to the merits of individuals. There is such a thing as the twelfth part of a denar. It was called a pondion. But there is no such thing as a twelfth part of the love of God” (T.W. Manson).
Thought What is my real motive for service?