Reading the Parable of the Vineyard Workers (Matthew 20:1-16) in Light of Martha Nussbaum’s Criticism of John Rawl’s Theory of Justice

“That’s not fair!”

I used to say this to my parents when I was growing up with my younger sister.

My sister is 4 years younger than me. So, she should get a smaller portion of dessert, right? At least, that’s what I used to think. Because I am her big brother, I deserve a bigger dessert portion than hers. But, she was also getting the same size of dessert. So, I protested to my parents, screaming, “That’s not fair!”

Of course, my sister and I have had many collisions when we were growing up. She and I have different expectations. Given our immaturity, it was rather natural that we get into arguments. And, sibling disputes between my sister and I were handled by the court of my father.

I understood that my father was the right person to play the role of the judge in resolving the sibling disputes between my sister and I, simply because he is the father to my sister and me. But, I often found that his rulings were “unfair”, as I felt that he ruled in favor of my sister.  Relatively, I felt that I was not treated “fairly”. And, my father’s reasoning was as simple as this, “Because you are her big brother”, when I challenged the validity of his rulings.  No more argument or discussion. Case simply closed with these words of my father.

When I thought a support from my mother, she simply told me, “If you don’t like the way things are in this house, leave home and get adopted by someone.”

Neither my father nor mother entertained my quest for “fairness” for me.

………………….

The Gospel story for the 25^th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year A), Matthew 20:1-16, the parable of the vineyard worker, brought me back to the above-described my childhood memory. Looking back now, it is a bit embarrassing to admit that I was such a brat, as my view of respect and dignity for myself was tainted by typical preadolescent self-centeredness.  So, I was simply screaming, “That’s not fair!” to my father out of jealousy toward my younger sister.

The parable in the Gospel narrative is about how the workers in the vineyard were rewarded by the owner of the vineyard for the works they did. In the parable, all the vineyard workers received the same amount of per diem pay, regardless how many hours they worked on that day. To this, workers, who started working early in the morning, became very upset that workers who came in the afternoons received the same pay, because that’s not fair to workers, who put more hours, if workers, who worked less ours, get the same amount of pay. But, in the parable, Jesus teaches that the way God cares us is like the way the vineyard owner pays his workers.  The punch line of Jesus’ teaching here is: the last will be first, and the first will be last (Matthew 20:16).

Because this is a parable, there is a metaphorical allegory. If we tried to interpret a metaphor literally, we will get lost.  The parable would make no sense at all, if taken literally.

After all, who in the world would pay the same wage to workers, who worked longer hours, and workers who worked less hours? The parable literally says that the vineyard wonder pay the same amount to all of his workers, regardless of their work hours.  Those who literally interpret this parable might feel discouraged to work harder, thinking, “Why in the heck do I have to work harder, if I am rewarded the same way as those who work less hard are?!”  Some even wonder, if Jesus was trying to teach communism.

See, how dangerous  a literal interpretation of this kind of  parable can be?  Now you see what a literal interpretation – fundamentalist approach – can lead to.

Of course, the parable of the vineyard worker is not about Marxian utopianism, where everyone receives the same pay, raising the status of the poor at the expenses of the rich.  The parable’s fact that the vineyard owner paid both workers , who worked all day long, and workers, who worked only some portions of the day, the same wage, does not mean raising the status of the latter workers at the expenses of the former’s hard work.

Obviously, the vineyard owner in the parable is a metaphor for God.  The vineyard workers who have been working since the crack of dawn refer to righteous people.  The workers who came to the vineyard in later hours to work are metaphorically meant for people who are considered less respected and esteemed, such as the outcast, the infirm, the sinners, and so forth.  Given that vineyard owner is a metaphor for God, the vineyard in the parable is about the Kingdom of Heaven.

Jesus begins this parable with these words, “The kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out at down to hire labors for his vineyard” (Matthew 20:1).  It suggests that God, the vineyard owner (landowner) went out to fill his kingdom, the vineyard, with good people, the vineyard workers.  The Kingdom of Heaven is not a static thing. Rather, it is dynamic, thus requires constant maintenance and development work, just as any vineyard and a farm demands constant work of care.  The harvest of the Kingdom can be compared to abundant harvest of grape in the vineyard.

The fact that God the vineyard owner need, people, the workers, also evokes the Creation narrative, in which God needed to fill the earth He created with people, thus, creating the first humans, Adam and Eve. Though Adam and Eve were not good stewards or tenants of the land that God provided, through Jesus, we make sincere efforts to be good stewards of God’s vineyard, which can be a metaphor for the Kingdom of Heaven.

In order for us to be good stewards – good workers – of God’s vineyard, the Kingdom, we shall not argue who is better – who should get more pay than others.  We have been wasting so much energy and so many hours arguing over such things. This is a typical human folly. No wonder that the first reading, Isaiah 55:6-9, that is echoed by this Gospel parable (Matthew 20:1-16) reminds us of the immeasurable supremacy of  the thinking and ways of God. It was like God telling us, “Don’t you dare to even mess with the way I do things!”  Yes, we need to be humble, acknowledging that the our ways, human ways, and thinking are plagued with problems and potential problems, often leading to conflicts and divisions.

Thinking and arguing who is better – who deserves more, etc. is a good example why God needs to remind us of His way’s supremacy. And, the parable of the vineyard workers (Matthew 20:1-16) further makes this point from Isaiah 55:6-9 with these words of the vineyard owner – God -, “My friend, I am not cheating you. Did you not agree with me for the usual daily wage? Take what is yours and go. What if I wish to give this last one the same as you? Or am I not free to do as I wish with my own money? Are you envious because I am generous?”(Matthew 20:13-15).  Basically, God in the image of the vineyard worker is telling, “Hey, shut up! If you don’t like the way I manage this vineyard, just take what you get and get out!” to teach those who complain a critical lesson that who is the boss – whose way is better. Not to mention, these words are like the aforementioned words of my mother, “If you don’t like the way things are in this house, leave home and get adopted by someone”, in response to my complaint, “That’s not fair!”

Well, I chose to stay home and adopt myself to the way my parents run the house.  I just let my younger sister enjoy the same privilege she got – though she is younger than me.

Note that what follows this parable is the story of the mother of James and John, together with her sons, begging Jesus a favoritism for them,  to have their status be elevated above the other disciples’ (Matthew 20:20-28). Of course, Jesus did not grant this request at all. Rather than flatly declining the request,  Jesus referred the authority of deciding who can sit his right and left I to the Father in heaven, as to remind the teaching of the supremacy of God the Father in Isaiah 55:6-9. Even Jesus, the Son, is subject to the Father’s authority.

The rest of the disciples responded with indignation to James and John, for their mother asking Jesus for favoritism.  This is similar to how workers, who worked all day, complained to the vineyard owner, about the fact that workers who came late and worked shorter hours received the same pay in the parable of   the vineyard workers.  The rest of the disciples felt, “That’s not fair!” about the prospect of James and John having their status elevated above theirs, sitting right and left to Jesus.

To this complaint from the rest of the disciples, Jesus responded in a similar way to the way he commented on the complaining vineyard workers.   Jesus said, “Thus, the last will be first, and the first will be last”(Matthew 20:16), in regard to the vineyard workers complaints, and stated, “Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant; whoever wishes to first among you shall be your slave”(Matthew 20:26-27).

So, if we attempt to understand the parable of the vineyard workers (Matthew 20:1-16) in comparison to the narrative of James, John, and their mother, asking Jesus favoritism (Matthew 20:20-28), we can conclude that the vineyard owner’s preferential treatment of the workers who joined in later hours and worked less is not a favoritism, because Jesus made it clear to James, John, and their mother, that favoritism has no place in his world, which can be referred to the Kingdom of Heaven and the discipleship, as well as the Ekklesia.  Another conclusion we can draw is that an argument on fairness, based on the human thinking, is fruitless. To those who complain, “That’s not fair!”, Jesus simply teaches us, in a way of saying, “Listen! If you think you have the right to complain as you do, do you really understand what I mean by ‘the last will be first, the first will be last’ and ‘whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant, whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave’?”  And, this is the end of useless argument of “That’s not fair!”

In God’s supreme thinking (Isaiah 55:8-9), and in the Kingdom of God, which comes with the metaphor of a vineyard in Matthew 20:1-16, the equity-based human thinking is useless. Perhaps, if you have followed Martha Nussbaum’s criticism of John Rawl’s equaity-based theory of justice, you can understand this matter better.

Unlike John Rawl’s theory of justice, Martha Nussbaum’s concept of justice recognizes significance of affective factors, including empathy and compassion. In other words, Nussbaum argues that justice cannot be understood like a mathematical equation.  Thus, we can compare Jesus’ view on the wage payments of the vineyard workers and the complaining workers’ view on wage distribution to Nussbaum’s view on justice and Rawl’s theory of justice.

For this comparison, we need to explore the allegorical metaphors in the parable of the vineyard workers.

The workers who joined working in the vineyard in later hours were just wasting their hours of the day in the market place (Matthew 20:3-7).

As I mentioned, the vineyard is the domain of the Lord, can be referred as the Kingdom. There is important work to do there – represented with the vineyard work. And the owner of the vineyard, the King of the Kingdom, is the Lord, who provides all of us what we need generously, as the vineyard owner pays his workers.  The market place, on the other hand, can be understood as a metaphor for a world of sin, outside God’s domain.  This is easily understood from how upset Jesus was when he saw the Temple had turned into a market place (i.e. Matthew 21:12-13). Thus, those who were wasting time, not working, in the market place, refer to sinners, as well as outcast. Because they did not have means to earn wages, they can be understood as the poor.

God in an image of the vineyard owner, goes out to the market place at 9 am (3^rd hour), noon (6^th hour), and 3 pm (9^th hour), to recruit additional workers out of those who were just wasting their day out in the world of sin – market place. Thus, the parable can be understood as a allegory of how God goes out to the world of sin to bring sinners and outcast into his domain, the God’s vineyard, the Kingdom. After all, the parable of the vineyard worker is a story of how God’s salvation works.

In fact, the vineyard owner, who goes out to the market place, contacting those who are wasting their lives there, is God in Jesus, who came to this world of sin, recruit his disciples – his workers, saying, “Come follow me” and who reaches out to those who are outcast, ignored, sick, sinners – those lest among peoples, to bring into his care – his vineyard.  An image of the vineyard workers going out to the market place to picking more to invite to work into his vineyard, giving opportunity to spend their wasted life more productively and meaningfully, can be also compared to Jesus, the Good Shepherd, who goes out to find and bring back to a lost sheep.

Human thinking only view those who are wasting their lives all day outside the market place useless, perhaps, deserve to be ignored. In human thinking, these people are regarded as incapable of working. But, God in the image of the vineyard worker sees them otherwise.  In fact, these people are not losers, as God sees them as capable of working.  That is why he called them to come into his vineyard and work there. And, they did.

This aspect of the parable of the vineyard worker touches Martha Nussbaum’s “capabilities approach”, as her concept of justice is unique enough to include not only empathy and compassion, which characterize God of mercy – Jesus, but also honoring the capabilities of people, especially those who tend to be seen incapable, incompetent, less capable, and less competent.

John Rawl’s equity-based theory of justice rather fits the typical human thinking, represented by the workers who complained about the wages in the parable of the vineyard worker.  Rawl’s view also reflects how the righteous older brother of the prodigal son complained and became angry in Luke 15:11-18.

In the world of Jesus, in his teaching, where the Kingdom is found, where the God’s vineyard is found, and where the salvation is attained, there is no space for Rawl’s view on justice.

Jesus’ teaching against the Lex Talionis legal principle in Mathew 5:38-42, is another strike against Rawl’s view.

To Rawl’s equity-based theory of justice, Jesus’ teaching in the parable of the vineyard workers (Matthew 20:1-16) and his teaching against the Lex Talionis, “That’s not fair!” But, to Nussbaum’s holistic view on justice, with attention to empathy and compassion, as well as with the capabilities approach, Jesus truly teaches justice.

Reflection On the feast of St. John Chrysostom and On the eve of Yom Kippur

September 13 is the solemn feast day of St. John Chrysostom. He was born in Antioch, Syria, in 347 AD. St. Chrysostom was the Archbishop of Constantinople of the Roman Empire.

He is a Syrian Saint.

Given the ongoing crisis in Syria today, it gives deeper meaning to pray with and reflect on St. Chrysostom today for peace and justice in his nation, Syria. 

Though we often put peace and justice together, a path to justice many not always be peaceful. It is rather turbulent and may become violent. In other words, we cannot be naively dovish in our pursuit of justice, which is eventually found in peace. In order to truly be committed to our pursuit of justice, we must be ready to struggles, to endure sufferings, and to fight with valor, as necessary. 

Life of St. Chrysostom, like life of St. Paul, gives us a fresh inspiring perspective for our needs to stand strong and to keep fighting for justice with courage and strengths. 

St. Chrysostom started his career as a monk, living in a very ascetic nature. This contributed to his strong discipline, which enabled him to stick to the truth that he preached – even though he was persecuted.  

While St. Chrysostom was a great preacher, known for his eloquent homilies, he was also a staunch fighter for justice, fighting against moral corruption plagued in the Empire. 

His zest for justice got him in trouble with Empress Aelia Eudoxia of the Byzantine Empire (a.k.a. East Roman Empire), as St. Chrysostom confronted the moral corruption of the empress. Not only his fight for justice put him against the Empress Eudoxia but also against Patriarch Theophilus of Alexandria.  Putting his own boss against him – rather than sinking into comfortable cronyism to keep his relationship with the empress and patriarch peaceful.  

No, St. Chrysostom did not choose superficial “peace”. Instead, he chose a “battle” in his relentless pursuit of justice. 

Such an aspect of St. Chrysostom reflects Jesus’ conflict-ridden relation to the religious authority of his time in Jerusalem. The way he confronted the religious leaders of the Temple in Jerusalem was extremely confrontational, far from a peaceful settlement.  Not only Jesus’ such a confrontational character for justice but also these hyperbolic powerful words of Jesus that St. Chrysostom embodied:

"Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword” (Matthew 10:34). 

St. Chrysostom’s fight against corruption, battle in pursuing justice, eventually cost his career as an archbishop, as he was put to exile more than once.  And, we was willing to pay this heavy cost as he did not become bishop to be chummy with the empress and the emperor…not even with the patriarch of Alexandra, his boss, but to serve the Lord Jesus Christ.  He was not a moral coward with a lukewarm faith, at all.  

He was persecuted. Yet, he never gave up on his pursuit of justice as he kept fighting for this cause all the way to his death in exile. 

In reflecting upon this aspect of St. Chrysostom, what comes to my mind is these words of Jesus:

Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 5:10).

In fact, St. Chrysostom is well-known for his eloquent homily on the beatitudes (Matthew 5:3-10), his homily No. 15. 

This homily reminds that our uncompromising pursuit and fight for justice, though it may not always peaceful, is ultimately our pursuit of the Kingdom of God. It also assures that we can bear all the costs on us for this battle for justice because of the abundant blessings from God. It also reminds us that humility, which St. Chrysostom explains with Jesus’ words of “poor in spirit”(Matthew 5:3),  is an indispensable condition in order for us to succeed in our battle for justice – the battle for the Kingdom. 

This year, the solemn feast day of St. Chrysostom falls on the beginning of Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish year, marking the importance of atonement. Because St. Chrysostom is also known for making homilies with anti-Semitic tones, I am hoping that this day is a day to reconcile his past anti-Semitic attitude with those how have been offended, certainly including God.  Though he is a Saint today, he was once a sinner, like us all. That is why we must seek atonement as the Jews observe Yom Kippur every year. That is why the Catholics seek the Sacrament of Reconciliation anytime necessary. 

Justice is found in the context of peace – though a path to justice may demand uncompromising fight. And, this peace, which upholds justice, is only attained through atonement and reconciliation – with each other and with God.  

May peace be found in Syria and elsewhere as we all continue to fight for justice with moral courage.


                    Prayer of Saint John Chrysostom

Almighty God, you have given us grace at this time with one accord to make our common supplication to you; and you have promised through your well-beloved Son that when two or three are gathered together in his Name you will be in the midst of them: Fulfill now, O Lord, our desires and petitions as may be best for us; granting us in this world knowledge of your truth, and in the age to come life everlasting.  Amen.