26th Sunday in Ordinary Time (year A)

(Mt 21:28–32)

28“What do you think? A man had two sons. He went to the first and said, ‘Son, go and work in the vineyard today.’ 29He replied, ‘I don’t feel like it.’ But then he had a change of heart and went. 30He went to the second and said the same thing. He replied, ‘I will, sir.’ But he did not go. 31Which of the two did the will of his father?’ They replied, ‘The first.’ And Jesus said to them, ‘Truly I tell you: tax collectors and prostitutes are entering the Kingdom of God ahead of you. 32For John came to you, showing you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but the tax collectors and prostitutes did believe him. You, on the other hand, saw these things, yet you did not even repent enough to believe him. 

------- -------------------------------------

The figure of the father is a nuisance; he represents duty, the norm, an obligation; he casts a shadow over you. Deep down, you would like to be like your father; you would like to be your own father. There is something in man called original sin which prevents him from accepting this principle; he wants to take control of his own origin, to be his own master – which means killing the father; it means denying the fact that he has an origin, a beginning, and refusing to accept that he is a beginning. We want to be the beginning of ourselves; therefore, the father bothers us, and we see him as one who makes demands, so we rebel.

The parable seeks to tear down that wall of self-righteousness and division which split Jewish society into the righteous and the sinners, and which led the former to feel they were already saved—and therefore in no need of salvation; an attitude which makes it impossible to be open to Jesus’ offer of salvation. The story, in fact, centres on two sons who have a single father and are therefore both placed on an equal footing. These two sons will be distinguished from one another not by their shared relationship to their father, but by the different responses they give him.

The father says to one son: ‘Son’; he calls him son – it is a vocative. Our fundamental vocation is to be called sons, that is, to accept that He is our father. If I do not accept being a son, I do not accept myself, I do not accept Him, I do not accept being a brother. So this word is important: Son! It is as a son that I exist! What I am is my being a son. I have received everything. If I do not accept being a son, I want to get my hands on everything and I destroy everything.

The offer of salvation is the same for all sons, but the response differs; and it is precisely here that the parable exposes religious hypocrisy. The first son gives a clear refusal, but then, having repented, he accepts his father’s invitation and goes into the vineyard. The initial negative attitude (refusal), passing through a process of conversion (‘he repented’), which involves re-examining one’s choices, one’s certainties and one’s life, is transformed into an existential openness to God, who is welcomed into one’s life (‘he went there [to the vineyard]’).

The first son emphatically proclaims his acceptance. “Yes, sir” (egō, kyrie). The construction of the sentence that Matthew uses in Greek is significant: egō kyrie kai ouk apēlthen, “Yes, sir, and I did not go” (v. 30). We might have expected Matthew to say: “Yes, sir, BUT I did not go”, as the CEI translation renders it. The difference may seem trivial, but it is not. The ‘but’, in fact, creates a contrast between words and deeds: the words are positive, but then there was a change in his decision; there might have been something that prevented him from keeping his promise, which might in some way have justified him. However, the ‘but’ is not there.  In its place, Matthew uses the conjunction ‘kai’ (‘and’), which expresses continuity between that ‘Yes, Lord’ and his failure to go. In other words, that immediate and ready acceptance of his father’s request conceals a lie, a refusal; not because he did not do it in the end, but because he never intended to do it in the first place.

In the figure of the first son, we see the attitude of the religious authorities. Their much-vaunted zeal, their ostentatious devotion, in reality serves only to mask emptiness. What is the point of spouting fine words if one’s life then goes in the opposite direction? It is in terms of action, therefore, that the true believer is measured, and only in this way does his worship acquire true meaning.

The second son, Jesus explains, represents the tax collectors and prostitutes (v. 31) – that is, two categories of people considered impure, cut off from salvation and, for this reason, ostracised by both civil and religious society. Well, this second son is now pitted against the first, who considered himself holy and God’s favourite, and to whom salvation was due. However, for Jesus, what makes the difference is not one’s social status, but the acceptance of his offer of salvation.

The parable, therefore, denounces hypocritical and deceitful behaviour, since it makes salvation depend on appearances rather than on what one actually is, as though God could be bought with a few prayers or sacrifices.

‘They will go before you into the kingdom of God.’ Jesus is not speaking of precedence; the verb does not mean that they take your place whilst you are left behind. The expression indicates exclusion: those whom you believe to be excluded from the kingdom of God have entered, whilst you have been left outside. Indeed, whilst the tax collectors and prostitutes had placed their faith in the word of the Baptist and had been converted, you, on the contrary, had opposed his ministry, just as you continued to do with Jesus. It is implied that those who did not accept the Baptist do not accept Jesus as the Messiah either. In this way, they opposed God’s plan, cutting themselves off from the path to salvation and closing the way to the Kingdom of Heaven.

Why do tax collectors and prostitutes ‘go ahead’ into the Kingdom of God? Because they know they are in the wrong. Knowing one is in the wrong is the dignity of man. The person who admits to having erred displays the greatest dignity, which is to acknowledge one’s fault. One who does not acknowledge one’s error is either dishonest or foolish. A person moves forward only if they acknowledge their past mistakes; in this way, their past is redeemed. Then they can say: Kyrie eleison! Those who feel they are righteous, on the other hand, will never ask for mercy. What do they have to ask forgiveness for?  

 Argentino Quintavalle, author of the books 

- Revelation – an exegetical commentary 

- The Apostle Paul and the Judaizers – Law or Gospel?

Jesus Christ, True God and True Man in the Mystery of the Trinity

The Prophetic Discourse of Jesus (Matthew 24–25)

All Generations Will Call Me Blessed

 Catholics and Protestants Compared – In Defence of the Faith

 The Church and Israel According to St Paul – Romans 9–11

(Available on Amazon)