Woof. I’m late. And I’m running out of time this week. But here’s what I see:
This is Episode 3. First, a man had two sons, each of whom he calls to work. Next, a man has a son whom he sends into his vineyard and is killed. Now, a king has a son for whom he throws a feast. This is the resurrection feast, the Eucharist, the Supper of the Lamb.
The king "calls" (kaleo). And the word appears six times. The king sends his slaves to call (kaleo) those who had been called (kaleo). Then he sends other slaves to the called (kaleo). A third time, the king refers to the non-attendees as "those who were called" (kaleo), finding them "not worthy." Instead, the slaves are to "call" as many as they find in the main highways. By the end, Jesus concludes that "many are called (kaleo), but few are chosen."
The story calls the called to heed God's call.
Why don’t they?
The first puzzle: Why didn't the called attend the wedding feast? I have a few thoughts:
It would have been in their best interest to attend. The Son of the king is, by hereditary monarchy, the next king. They ought to have attended out of self-interest, if not out of love.
Here is some of the language: The once-called "carelessly neglect" (ameleo) the call (22:5). a- is a negative particle prefixed to meleo, which denotes care, responsibility, and ownership. This man’s wedding, in their eyes, ultimately doesn’t have to do with them.
One went to his "own (idios) farm (agros)." The emphasis appears to be on the "own-ness" of the farm.
“Another to his emporos.” This is difficult. Poros is "journey" and em- makes it journey-man, but the term is used elsewhere to describe a merchant (e.g. Matt. 13:45; Rev. 18). I believe English would best capture the metaphorical sense of the term by using the word, "venture," which we also take to describe both business and a journey. Either way, a significant narrative that is distinct from the narrative of the king’s Son.
I can't think of a single, key OT passage that relates to this, but a couple come to mind. First, God's complaint against the returned exiles in Hosea 1, which is that they attend to their own houses before they've rebuilt his house and kept his feasts. Second, Moses' warning in Deut. 6 about what will happen when they inhabit houses they didn't build, and forget God's deliverance.
For whatever reason, the fact in the story is that these once-called neglect the next call, as their absorption in their own ventures becomes a neglect of their promise/commitment to attend the wedding feast when the time comes.
What's with the wedding garments? The answer is easy: The robes signify righteousness. But I’m curious how these robes relate to other garments in Scripture. Here comes a torrent of thoughts:
At the Transfiguration, Jesus' clothing becomes white (e.g. Matt. 17:2).
It does again at the Resurrection (e.g. Matt. 28:3).
Daniel had said that the Ancient of Days would wear white (7:9).
In Revelation, the Sardisians have a few folks who will "walk with Jesus in white," as they have not soiled their garments (Rev. 3:4). Keep their religion pure, as James might say, by attending to orphans and widows. This is a great image. Thanks, John.
The twenty-four elders wear white (4:4), as do the great multitude (7:9, 13), and some angels (15:6), and the armies (19:14). John points out that their white robes have been given to them (6:11). That matters.
Another relevant text, in Ecclesiastes, puzzles me. I'll structure it the way I see it, which is as a series of seven imperatives (the only such cluster of imperatives in Eccl.), each calling people to live happily. After the first three, there is an explanation. After the next three there is an explanation. After the seventh, there is an explanation. This gives the text a 3+3+1 pattern, which is a common structure in Scripture for relating a list to creation. Notably, it places the issue of garments at the structural center:
"Go then; (God sends his Spirit and speaks his word on the first day.)
"eat your bread in happiness; and (... I've got nothing here ...)
"drink your wine with a cheerful heart; for God has already approved your works. (God creates fruit on the third day.)
"Let your clothes be white all the time; and (God creates time-keeping celestial bodies on the fourth day.)
"let not oil be lacking on your head. (God gives his first blessing on the fifth day.)
"Enjoy life with the woman whom you love all the days of your fleeting life which He has given to you under the sun; for this is your reward in life and in your toil in which you have labored under the sun. (God gives Adam and Eve to one another on the sixth day.)
"Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might; for there is no activity or planning or knowledge or wisdom in Sheol where you are going" (9:7-10). (God rests from activity on the seventh day.)
There's something here, I'm sure. Maybe it's this:
Whether ironically or sincerely, Ecclesiastes is describing lux life under the sun. White is for festal times, and for wealthy people, and for Wimbledon (which combines the two).
And if your life is nice enough, and you are a secure member of the elite class or the upper middle class, every day can be a party (hence, “Let your clothes be white all the time”).
In the New Testament, the saints are the upper middle class of heaven. They may be poor on earth, but they are rich to God, and their white garments symbolize this. They will judge the twelve tribes (Matt. 19). As the moon and the stars rule time (Gen. 1:14, the fourth day), the saints are the new moon and stars (cf., "among whom you shine like stars," Phil. 2).
On their wedding days, brides wear white, shining like the sun, because, for one day, the whole world revolves around them. (There's truth to this, yes?)
And white clothes are also for wedding guests—the lesser lights. It's appropriate to go, eat well, drink well, be glad, enjoy your marriage, dance mightily, and dress brightly for a wedding.
And it’s just as appropriate for the king to expect his guests to forget their own farms and ventures for a day, and celebrate with his Son.
There are better passages in the Old Testament, I think. Zechariah 3:3-4, for one: "Now Joshua was standing before the angel, clothed with filthy garments. And the angel said to those who were standing before him, 'Remove the filthy garments from him.' And to him he said, 'Behold, have taken your iniquity away from you, and I will clothe you with pure vestments.'"
Joshua is going to be a king, for one, so he needs nice clothes. But he's also a priest, and priests need clean clothes. And we also know that dressing up the outside, while neglecting the inside, is no good. Plus, only God can make our hearts clean (cf. "Create in me, a clean heart," Ps. 51). Hence the moral quality:
God cleans his priest-kings (ontology) and their clothes (ritual symbol).
I'm not sure how to tie this all together, but there are a few observations. And I'm not preaching for another two days.
What the wedding feast is. I think there are lots of real referents for this:
This is about the Eucharist. Which is a wedding feast to which God has gathered many people, the good and the bad. Come to the Eucharistic feast.
This is about the poor. Matthew will go on to say that eating with the poor is eating with Jesus (Matt. 25). Where Luke tells this same parable (Luke 14), he also criticizes those who only eat with friends - "Where is your reward?"
This is about rejoicing at the return of sinners. Luke also tells a story about a man who was given a robe and a party by his father, and another son who wouldn't come in and enjoy it, since he was tending to his own work (Luke 15).
This is about the eschatological banquet (Rev. 19). I mean, of course. And the point of the first three referents has to be this - by attending to these lesser feasts now, we prepare ourselves to respond to that final festal call when it finally comes.
This is a place where we could make an argument for the disciplinary purpose of the Church calendar. George Herbert put it this way in his poem, "Lent": "The Scriptures bid us fast; the Church sayes, now."
There are those who get so fixated on the Church's feasts that they neglect Jesus and the poor. There are those who feel so intensely their own Christian liberty, that they don't know how to be called to a feast that they didn't plan. Those are the people who won't be ready to party when the prophets say it's time for the Wedding Feast.
Here's a question I think the gospel text poses to us: "Can you pull yourself away from your own ventures in order to join God's joyful celebration of the life of his Son, the poor, and the repentant?"
Providentially, one reason why I don’t have time to finish this post the way I’d like to is that our church is providing the food for a dinner this evening that will serve 60 formerly incarcerated persons, and other otherwise lonely members of our city. I have to run to the store and buy a bunch of groceries for it.
For me and, I imagine, for others, this is a good and joyful thing to do, but one which will tear us away from our ventures more than we wish they would.
Lord, have mercy. And Come quickly, Lord Jesus.