Once more Jesus spoke to them in parables, saying: 2‘The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who gave a wedding banquet for his son. 3He sent his slaves to call those who had been invited to the wedding banquet, but they would not come. 4Again he sent other slaves, saying, “Tell those who have been invited: Look, I have prepared my dinner, my oxen and my fat calves have been slaughtered, and everything is ready; come to the wedding banquet.” 5But they made light of it and went away, one to his farm, another to his business, 6while the rest seized his slaves, maltreated them, and killed them. 7The king was enraged. He sent his troops, destroyed those murderers, and burned their city. 8Then he said to his slaves, “The wedding is ready, but those invited were not worthy. 9Go therefore into the main streets, and invite everyone you find to the wedding banquet.” 10Those slaves went out into the streets and gathered all whom they found, both good and bad; so the wedding hall was filled with guests.
11 ‘But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing a wedding robe, 12and he said to him, “Friend, how did you get in here without a wedding robe?” And he was speechless. 13Then the king said to the attendants, “Bind him hand and foot, and throw him into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” 14For many are called, but few are chosen.’
Cf. The priests and their families considered it exceedingly important to wear the right holy garments in front of the Sovereign God (Lev. 10:1–7).
Isaiah and Ezekiel picture God clothing those who have been saved with the wedding garment of salvation.( Is 61:10 ; Ez 16:8-14).
The righteous and elect shall be saved on that day … they shall eat and rest and rise with the Messiah for ever … they shall wear garments of glory. (1 Enoch 62.13-15)
The book of Revelation refers to the righteous being clothed with the garments of glory. Revelation 3:4-5 and explains that the fine linen is the righteous deeds of the saints.” (19:9).
The father puts the ‘best robe’ on his prodigal son
Jesus compares the Messianic age to a new garment (cf. Mk 2:21).
The dazzling white clothes of Jesus at the Tranfiguration stand as symbols for glory (cf Mt 17:2) and the new life in Jesus (cf Gal 3:27; Col 3:10;Eph 4:24).
They are also used to refer to the life of the resurrection (cf 2 Cor 5:1-4).
When new converts were baptised in the early Church they were given new garments.
The wedding garments symbolize the good deeds necessary for Christian life and also the fruits of the kingdom of God (cf Mt 21:43).
Jeremias says that the wedding garment was not a special garment, but simply a newly washed garment. If the garment were dirty it would be an insult to the host. When the king came into the marriage feast he asked the man in effect, “By what right did you come into my feast in dirty clothes?”
St. Gregory the Dialogist wrote that the wedding garment symbolizes the virtue of charity. He said that cloth is woven between two beams, an upper and a lower. In like fashion is our spiritual garment woven, with an upper beam, which is love of God, and a lower beam, which is love of our neighbour. One must love God with his whole soul, and heart, and strength. Only thus can we approach the eucharist. “These are great precepts,”sublime precepts, and are to many hard to fulfil: nevertheless this is the wedding garment. And whoever sits down at the wedding feast without it, let him watch with fear, for when the King comes in, he shall be cast forth.”
There’s a Jewish story about a rich tax-collector called Bar Moja . Bar Moja dies.He has a splendid funeral. Work stops throughout the entire city as the whole population wishes to escort him to his final resting place. Bar Moja was not pious but he had died while performing one good deed. He’d thrown a banquet for all the city councilors. They looked down their noses at the invitation. They didn’t want to be seen mixing with social climbers like him. So Bar Moja had failed in trying to impress the high-ups. But he didn’t want the food to go to waste so he did a good deed and invited all the poor of the city.
For example, Johann Ben Zakkai cites a parable. A King once held a banquet. He did not tell the invited people the time of the feast, but directed them to be prepared to attend it. Since it was to be at the royal palace, the clever ones realised it would be ready soon, and waited at the palace gate. Others, who were stupid, calculated it would take long to be ready and were engrossed in their particular tasks.
Suddenly, with no warning, the time was announced. Those who were ready went in and partook of the food and drink. Those who had come without the wedding garment, however, had to sorrowfully stand outside the palace gates.
Jeremias suggests another possibility based on a rabbinic parallel. According to this parallel, there was “a king who issued invitations to a banquet, without specifying the hour. The wise attired themselves, while the foolish went on with their work. Suddenly the summons came, and those who were not dressed in clean clothes were not admitted to the banquet” (The Parables of Jesus (SCM 1972) J. Jeremias p. 188).
In this case the man was a fool; the summons for the feast came earlier than he expected and he was unprepared. The rabbinic parallel suggests that the wedding garment refers to repentance.
Cf Isaiah 25:6-9, where Isaiah dreams of a great banquet to be held at the end of history in which “the LORD of hosts” spreads the banquet and serves the food of kings. It will be held on the holy mountain of the Lord and the guests will include peoples from all the Gentile nations
The Targum translation of Isaiah’s great banquet has: The Lord of hosts will make for all the peoples in this mountain a meal. And although they supposed it is an honor, it will be a shame for them and great plagues, plagues from which they will be unable to escape, plagues whereby they will come to their end. (The Isaiah Targum, trans. Bruce Chilton [Edinburgh,T &T Clark, 19871, p. xxvii).
Second-century B.C. E. Enoch ‘speaks of a great banquet with the Messiah and affirms that the Gentiles will be included. But the angel of death will be present and will use his sword to destroy those Gentiles. The banquet hall will run with blood and the believers will be obliged to wade through the gore to reach the banquet hall where they sit down with the Messiah!’ 1 Enoch 62:1-11
Qumran’s The Messianic Rule, discusses the famous banquet. The Qumran community ‘was certain that no Gentiles would be present. Only pious Jews who observed the law would be allowed to attend. “And then [the Mess]iah of Israel shall [come] and the chiefs of the [clans of Israel] shall sit before him, [each] in the order of his dignity, according to [his place] in their camps and marches.”’ The Messianic Rule (IQSa 2:11-22),” in The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, trans. Géza Vermes (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1975), p. 121.
‘Earlier in this same scroll the text affirms that no one can attend the banquet who is “smitten in his flesh, or paralyzed in his feet or hands, or lame, or blind or deaf or dumb or smitten in his flesh with a visible blemish.” The Messianic Rule (IQSa 2:5-10),”’ in The Dead Sea Scrolls in English, trans. Geza Vermes (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1975 See Kenneth Bailey: Jesus Through Middle Eastern Eyes (SPCK London 2008) pp. 310f
‘Matthew’s parable of the royal wedding feast has a rich biblical background. The theme of the invitation to Wisdom’s banquet is prominent in Proverbs 1 —9, with its climax in the contrasting banquets hosted by Lady Wisdom and Lady Folly. Matthew identified Jesus as the Wisdom of God in 11:25—30, and so rejecting his invitation means rejecting Wisdom. Moreover, Matthew’s upgrading of the banquet into a royal wedding feast in honor of the king’s son combines the motifs of God’s kingdom as a banquet and Jesus’ identity as the Son of God and Israel’s Messiah/Son of David.’ Harrington – The Synoptic Gospels Set Free: Preaching without Anti-Judaism (Paulist Press 2009) p. 53
However, this parable has often been used for anti-semitic purposes. ‘If Matthew rewrote the parable in light of the events of 70 CE (as seems likely), then he was interpreting the destruction of Jerusalem as due to the failure of the Jewish religious establishment (the chief priests and the Pharisees, not the whole people) to accept Jesus’ invitation to enter the kingdom of heaven. This move does present a problem, since it suggests that the Roman conquerors were instruments of God for punishing Jerusalem and its leaders. However, the biblical prophets frequently designated their people’s conquerors (Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, etc.) as instruments of God’s wrath (though with the assumption that they too would eventually be punished)….. Matthew 22:1—14 contains many themes for preachers and teachers. It is important, however, that they avoid interpreting Matthew as rejecting Israel per se and viewing the church as Israel’s replacement (supersessionism). Throughout his Gospel Matthew (like Josephus) makes it clear that his quarrel was with Israel’s alleged leaders and not with the people as a whole. In fact, Matthew was convinced that Israel’s heritage as God’s people was best preserved by those who accept Jesus’ invitation to his royal wedding feast in God’s kingdom and try to act in accord with Jesus’ own teachings. Harrington – The Synoptic Gospels Set Free: Preaching without Anti-Judaism (Paulist Press 2009) pp. 53-54
Cf. Rabbi Eliezer said, “Repent one day before your death.” His disciples asked him, “But can a man know on what day he will die?” He said, “So much the more must he repent today. Perhaps he will die tomorrow. It follows that a man should repent every day. Thus in his wisdom Solomon said: ‘Let your garments lways be white, and let not oil be lacking on your head’ [Ecclesiastes 9:8].”
Cf. The matter may be compared to a king who arranged a banquet and invited guests to it. The king issued a decree which stated, “Each guest must bring something on which to recline.” Some brought carpets, others brought mattresses or pads or cushions or stools, while still others brought logs or stones. The king observed what they had done, and said, “Let each man sit on what he brought.” Those who had to sit on wood or stone murmured against the king. They said, “Is it respectful for the king, that we, his guests, should be seated on wood and stone?” When the king heard this, he said to them, “It is not enough that you have disgraced with your wood and stone the palace which was erected for me at great cost, but you dare to invent a complaint against me! The lack of respect paid to you is the result of your own action.”
Similarly, in the Hereafter, the wicked will be sentenced to Gehinnom and will murmur against the Holy One Blessed Be He, saying, “We sought His salvation. How could such a fate befall us?” He will answer them, “When you were on earth did you not quarrel and slander and do evil? Were you not responsible for strife and violence? That is why it is written, ‘All you that kindle a fire, that encircle yourselves with firebrands, walk in the flame of your fire and among the brands that you have kindled’ [Isaiah 50:11]. If you say, ‘This we have from Your hand,’ it is not so; you have brought it on yourselves, and therefore, ‘you will lie down in torment’ [ibid]” (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 3: 9).
To return to the home page, click on the header at the top of this page.
Tags: Year A
recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary 