Isa 55:6-9 Phil 1:20-24,27 Mt 20:1-16
The Nobel Prize-winning economist and philosopher
Amartya Sen, in his famous book An Idea of Justice published in 2009
puts across a story to make his point clear. Three children – Anne, Bob and
Carla – are quarrelling over a flute: Anne claims the flute on the ground that
she is the only one of the three who knows how to play it; Bob demands it on
the basis that he is from a poor family and unlike others, he has no other toys
to play with and it would therefore mean a lot to him if the flute were given
to him; and Carla says that it belongs to her because she has made it with her
own labour. The important thing to note here is that none of them questions
their rival’s argument but claims that his or hers is the most persuasive.
So, who deserves the flute? Should it go to Bob who
hails from a poor family, for whom it represents the only source of entertainment
as he has no other toys to play with? Or to Anne who can actually make
practical use of it; or to Carla to whom it must belong by virtue of her right
to the fruits of her labour? The answer, according to Amartya Sen, is that
there is actually no one “right” answer to this puzzle. The point he tries to
emphasize here is that there is no one perfect process or criterion to arrive
at a conclusion that would be acceptable to all.
The question as to who really deserves the flute
can be decided in many ways – either through a process of reasoning or on
compassionate grounds such as charity or by majority opinion or by an arbitrary
method like tossing the coin. One of the things that Amartya Sen tries to prove
in his book is this: Who gets the flute depends on the idea of justice one has.
Certainly our idea of justice varies from person to person.
Similarly, Jesus’ notion of justice exposed in the
parable of the labourers, whether acceptable to us or not depends on our idea
of justice. Whatever may be our idea of justice, but the invitation given to us
through the liturgy of the word is to make Jesus Christ’s outlook of justice as
our own.
This is a parable most of us would be disturbed
about. The parable does not seem to be convincing for all of us. It is a hard
teaching for us to digest. How those who toiled little could be equated with
those who have toiled, suffered, experienced the pain of the work, and spent
all their energy all throughout the day? Apparently the parable does not seem
to provide a justification for being equally paid. Here is where we need to
look into the notion of justice Jesus had.
Jesus is giving a new dimension of justice. The
notion of justice in the mind of Jesus is interwoven with charity. The meeting
point or encounter between justice and charity is not something friendly and
often rivalry if perceived from human logic. This is very crucial to
understand. What we should keenly note in the owner of the vineyard is that he
was both just and charitable. He paid the amount that he agreed. He did not
betray or cheat them. He paid what he promised. By paying an equal amount to
the other set of workers who laboured less than the first set of workers, the
owner has given them surplus or extra which they do not deserve for the amount
of work they have given. This surplus or extra refers to the charity done by
the owner. It is not a payment done for their undeserving labour, but a charity
done for their need.
By being charitable to others, he was in no way
acting unjustly towards the first set of workers. The act of the owner is
justified on the grounds of the existential condition of the workers who came
later to work. It is not that they were unwilling to work throughout the day,
but there was no one to provide the work. If the owner would have paid them
even after looking at their attitude of unwilling to work, then certainly what
he did would be unjust.
If we rightly understand the justification which
lies on the side of the owner, then, the attitude of the first set of workers
towards the others is one of jealousy. The parable teaches us to become aware
that the basic need of every human being is the same. The persons who were
called at the last hour had the same basic need as that of those who were
called for work in the morning, mid-morning, and at noon. The parable exposes the social evil of
unemployment. The owner of the vineyard was able to sense that. He was able to
understand at large that the others did not have opportunity to invest their
labour and energy in order to earn their livelihood and at the same time their
basic need is inevitable. It is a matter of survival and also a lack of
opportunity. The urge for survival and the impossibility of an opportunity to
earn the survival is the most utter condition of many in the world. This
understanding made him to surpass the acceptable framework of justice and to
act on charitable grounds.
Let me put a pertinent question to you: Does a
person who has no means to earn his or her living has a right to exist in this
world? Certainly yes! If your answer is otherwise, then it would imply that
those who are insane, physically deficient, old-aged should not survive. We
should situate the parable in the wider context of the human community. God is
so compassionate with everyone. As a matter of justice, if He should judge us
and provide us according to our capacities, our dispositions and our actions,
then it may apply to some of us that we do not deserve the life we have now. It
is purely as a matter of charity, compassion, mercy, kindness that surpasses
justice we still have the Divine Providence.
So far, the exposition we had on the parable was
based on a social context. Looked at from the context of our Christian
community, the parable invites us to check our attitude we have about our
fellow brethren. The parable gives a serious warning. Since many have received
the great privilege of coming in the Christian Church and fellowship very
early, right at the beginning, they cannot claim a special honour and a special
place. All persons, no matter when they come, are equally precious to God.
There are people who think that, because they have
been members of a Church for a long time, the Church practically belongs to
them and they can dictate its policy. In
the Christian Church seniority does not necessarily mean honour. Based on
seniority we tend to have an exclusivistic mentality. Therefore, the perpetrators
of evil, people belonging to other religions, those who engage in unbecoming
acts are seen to be undeserving of Divine providence, because we think their
capacity and disposition does not equate to the blessings of God they receive,
as we note in the parable that the first set of workers thought that the other
set of workers who came later do not deserve the same amount as they received.
If our attitudes and mentality is similar to that
of the first set of workers then the parable should hit us and break that
mentality which is unchristian. The words of John the Baptist which target this
mentality in the Pharisees and Sadducees is targeted to us now: The axe is
already laid at the root of the tree (Mt 3:10). It is up to us to uproot this
unchristian mentality!
No comments:
Post a Comment