The Wedding Banquet
Ordinary Sunday 28, 12th October, 2008
Fr Matthew Healy
Assistant Priest, St Peter's, Eastern Hill
When you first hear today's Gospel proclaimed it is a disturbing story. It is described by one biblical scholar as "an upsetting parable, a brutal story with terrific mood swings."[1] The parable describes a king who is host to a party for his son's wedding. Its message is not so obvious in a cursory hearing.
The parable is the third of three successive parables delivered by Jesus within the Temple in Jerusalem to the chief priests and Pharisees in the week before his passion and death. So the air is tense and the danger is imminent. The three parables revolve around the question put to Jesus by the religious leaders: "By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?" All three parables contain a crucial 'sting in the tail' which is about the judgement faced by those who reject or accept the authority of Jesus and the one who sent him.
The hearer of the parable would expect the story to begin with the honoured invitations been gratefully obliged, a joyful expectation of a sumptuous banquet which would crescendo with all-round happiness. But instead what we have is a see-saw of joy and sadness, acceptance and rejection, of being a guest in a hall full of strangers — the good, the bad and the ugly — and the father of the groom acting more like a bouncer than a gracious host. Some wedding party!
The parable works like this: The King (who is symbolic of God) calls those of the extended family and friends (symbolising Israel) to the wedding banquet of his Son (symbolising the incarnation and mission of Jesus). Even when the King sends out his slaves on two occasions (the slaves symbolising the Hebrew Prophets) with an invitation to the wedding, the offer is consistently refused. To make matters worse the second set of slaves were beaten and murdered. Hence the King, filled with rage, has those who rejected his invitation slaughtered and their village razed to the ground. This particular aspect of the parable further grates on our modern ears which like to hear 'nice things,' though it must remembered this is Matthew's literary way of addressing a matter keenly felt by Matthew's Jewish-Christian community, namely the fall of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple in the year 70 AD.
So, up to this point, we have heard of God's dealings with Israel, who have rejected his invitation to the wedding banquet of his Son. The time is now urgent; for the groom and his bride are ready and awaiting their wedding feast; the banquet table is set, but the reception hall remains empty. So the King sends out more slaves, this time to the highways and byways and invites the outcast, the dejected and the outsiders to the wedding banquet of his Son — the good and the bad, the mad and the sad — all are welcome. This open invitation to outsiders announces the beginning of a new stage in salvation history, the Christian age. Now non-Jews, the uncircumcised, are to be welcomed by the God of Israel, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, into a covenantal relationship with him through his Son.
Now that the banquet hall is full of strange, unknown guests, enjoying a sumptuous party, the King enters the hall and soon becomes aware of someone who is not wearing the appropriate wedding garment, a garment that would have been supplied to each guest. Immediately our modern cultural minds react to such an ungracious act of a host who has compelled strangers into the feast almost by the 'scruff of their neck'. We might ask "So what, a person has failed to put on the wedding garment?" But then the unthinkable happens, the host throws out the inappropriately attired guest into the depths of Sheol where they will have their teeth (or perhaps their dentures!) grind and gnash away for all eternity. The parable concludes with the warning that "Many are called, but few are chosen." And this is meant to make us shiver with a chill down our spine!
'Who' and 'what' is being addressed by this parable? I would argue that three groups of people with their own issues are being addressed.
The first group of people addressed is that of the Jewish-Christians of Matthew's church. Their issue is to do with the grief at the loss of the Temple and the destruction of the holy City which was a devastating blow to their self-identity. How would things now work without Temple worship or the priesthood? Not only did their understanding of Jesus through the lens of traditional Jewish religion now require some fresh re-thinking and a letting go of old ways, but their connections with their Jewish communities were now fractured because they had been recently ejected from their synagogues because of their profession of Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah.
The second group of people addressed is that of the Gentile-Christians of Matthew's church. The issue of the new Gentile members was that they required catechizing in the faith of Israel and of its expectation of a Messiah, fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth. For whilst they were not required to undergo male circumcision, the dietary laws remained a contentious matter, especially of meats offered to pagan idols. So as the new non-Jewish members were welcomed into the church they were expected to be clothed in a new way of life by integrating Christian values into their everyday situation. Clearly some in Matthew's church were failing in this regard. Whatever custom or practice previously held by a Gentile convert which were not compatible with their new Christian life must be remedied. Since they have been given the garment of Christ in baptism, they must now wear that garment in every aspect of their living. Hence if you are so bold as to be at the "Wedding Banquet" without being clothed in the "wedding garment" of salvation, then you "eat and drink to your own damnation", as stated by St Paul to the troublesome church in Corinth.
The third group of people addressed is that of the church of all time and places: the local church of this Diocese of Melbourne; the parish of St Peter's, Eastern Hill; I and you now gathered at the "Wedding Banquet" of Christ.
Despite the awkward hearing that the parable makes on modern ears, it has some important things to say about what it is to be church. It is a parable on ecclesiology. The parable weaves together the theme of salvation history as being God's generous, indiscriminate and open invitation into a new way of life. This new way of life demands from those who have accepted its invitation, the call, to be responsible guests at the wedding banquet. The response asked is to lead lives worthy of your calling — the life of a disciple of Jesus — disciplined lives. Therefore the "Wedding Banquet" is an analogy for our life in Christ as his body, the church.
What thing does this parable teach us about being the church, the bride of the groom? What does the metaphor of the "Wedding Garment" of salvation mean for us today?
Firstly, the parable teaches us that the church is missionary by its very nature. Its call is to be responsible for the mission of inviting all people to be guests at the "Wedding Banquet" of Christ. The church is not called to be an elite club, nor to be self-absorbed with its own metaphoric 'eating and drinking' — the church does not exist for itself, but for Christ and it is in Christ that we have the responsibility to proclaim the gospel of salvation to all people and nations. The Church is Apostolic — 'evangelical' in its missionary endeavours and 'Apostolic' in its teaching.
Secondly, the old sign board for this church (which is in the courtyard of Keble House) expresses very well an aspect of this parable: "This church is 'free' and 'open'." The church is 'free' because the only cost involved is to be 'you' and to accept the invitation. The church is 'open' because it does not discriminate between rich and poor, the good and the bad, the saint and the sinner. The message of the father is the message of the church: all are invited into newness of life in Christ — all are invited to the "Wedding Banquet." The Church is truly Catholic — 'free' and 'open.'
Thirdly, the church has the responsibility to teach and form the 'banquet guests' into wearing the "Wedding Garment" of salvation. In the words of St Augustine of Hippo in a sermon on this parable "Whatever can this wedding garment be...? ....your wedding garment.....is not love of just any kind. Many people of bad conscience appear to love one another, but you will not find in them the love that springs from a pure heart, a clear conscience, and a genuine faith. Only that kind of love is the wedding garment." [2]
Finally, the 'sting in the tail' of the parable is its confrontation of our personal integrity in the Christian faith that we profess, the connection between what we profess with our lips and how we live what we profess. In the words of the Letter of St James "Let your 'yes' be a yes, and your 'no' be a no." [3]
May we come to trust more fully that God's grace shall accomplish within us what was begun in our baptism — to be effective messengers of the gospel, to be faithful stewards at the "Wedding Banquet", and to be a people of integrity in both our personal and corporate lives!
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
Notes:
[1] Alyce M McKenzie, "Matthew", Interpretation Bible Studies, page 76.
[2] St Augustine of Hippo, Sermon 90, 1.5-6: PL 38,559. 561-563.
[3] James 5:12
|
Views is a
publication of
St Peter's Eastern Hill, Melbourne Australia.
|
