Jesus of Nazareth: What He Wanted, Who He Was

On the one hand the parable describes the old society soberly and realistically, the society that repeatedly gains the upper hand even where Jesus is attempting to gather the people of God anew. There it is every person for himself or herself. There everyone struggles for her or his own existence. There people are envious when someone has more. There we find unending conflict between those “above” and those “below.” But rivalry exists in the same way—perhaps even more—between those who belong to the same social class. Their comparing of themselves to one another leads to constant mistrust and ongoing power struggles.

Law, one of the most valuable achievements of humanity, exists to hold these struggles somewhat in check. It is quite right that workers living in such a society struggle for their rights. In a world built on rivalry they have no other choice. The masterful art of the parable consists precisely in the way it shows, with the greatest possible economy of words and images, how God’s new world suddenly erupts into this world of the old society. For the story ends differently from what the hearers expect. They expect the last workers, who were idle almost all day, to receive only a couple of copper coins. That they receive exactly as much as the first must have been a great shock to Jesus’ listeners. The ground was ripped from under their feet. All previous standards were removed. But if they open themselves to the parable they do not fall into nothingness but find their feet standing on the ground of the reign of God, God’s new society.

In the reign of God, different rules apply. It is true that people work from morning to night here too. God’s world is not a land of the lotus eaters. But here work has dignity, and no one need go home in the evening filled with worry and anxiety. No one is alone. Above all: it is possible to live without rivalry because there is now something greater and more expansive than all one’s own desires: work for God’s cause. Precisely this common cause desired by everyone creates a solidarity that makes it possible to suffer with the suffering of others and to join in others’ joy.

Of course, in the world of the parable this new society has not yet come to fruition. It is proleptically visible only in the landowner, who—contrary to all experience in the old society—is “good” (20:15). The Greek text uses agathos for “good.” The word is usually translated “generous” here: “Are you envious because I am generous?” That is how the NRSV has the landowner speak to one of the resentful workers. But the Greek text, when literally translated, has “is your eye evil because I am good?” That is not quite the same, because in its basic meaning

agathos means “good” in the sense of “usable,” “suitable,” “appropriate,” “proper.” When the landowner gives the last just as much as the first he acts properly, reasonably, and therefore well. He is, of course, not “reasonable” according to the standards of a society shaped by struggles to divide things but reasonable by the standards of the reign of God. Jesus was the first to fully grasp the reasonableness of the reign of God. It is reflected, for example, in his demands in the Sermon on the Mount. Renunciation of violence (Matt 5:38-42) is the only possible way to bring about genuine peace. Jesus rejected all violence in principle and thus set in motion a sequence of effects that could not have been foreseen. Therefore he is the suitable, the appropriate, person.

Yet again: at the moment when Jesus tells the story, the new thing has not yet begun to spread. It is proleptically visible only in him, the most suitable person for the reign of God. But it is also already visible in his disciples and sympathizers: namely, at the moment when they abandon their own rivalries and assist one another in solidarity.

All this has probably made it clear that we miss the meaning of the parable if we designate its theme simply as the overflowing generosity of God. Obviously, it ultimately speaks of God’s limitless and undeserved generosity, but if the parable was about only that it would be completely devoid of obligatory character. Every believer speaks today of God’s generosity; such talk costs nothing and changes nothing. If Jesus had talked only about the generous God he would not have been crucified.

The grumbling of the workers hired at the first hour reflects the grumbling of those contemporaries of Jesus who were outraged by the new thing he was beginning with his disciples: a common life growing out of constant forgiveness and solidarity and in which, therefore, latecomers and sinners who had not offered any service found their place. Jesus was reproached again and again for eating with tax collectors and sinners.