November 16 NOTES FOR REFLECTION
Texts: Zephaniah 1:7, 12-18; 1 Thessalonians 5:1-11; Matthew 25:14-30
Theme: The phrase "Use it or lose it" came immediately to mind, but whether or not that would be a suitable theme may depend on the sensitivities of your local faith community. "Accountability" (with or without its constant companion, "Transparency") may be a more dignified choice. "The Day of Reckoning" may also cut the mustard (which is a very strange phrase, now I come to think of it!) I do hope we can all agree to reject "Wealth Creation 101" or any variant thereof, although "God's Guide to Real Investment" might offer something worth developing. What about "The Divine Art of Risk-taking"? On balance (pun only partly intended) that's my choice for the week.
Introduction. We begin this week with more prophetic blood, threat and tears, this time from Zephaniah. Perhaps the connection with the gospel passage, which is not immediately obvious, is to be found in the mental image of the Master (God) displayed by the servant entrusted with only one talent (verses 24-25 of the gospel passage). This might also form a link with our second lesson, especially verse 9, where St Paul writes that "God has destined us not for wrath but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ". And St Matthew rounds things off for us this week with one of the more complex of Jesus' judgment parables.
Background. As with many of the parables the Parable of the Talents seems to invite an almost limitless number of interpretations. I shall limit myself to three. First, some of you may recall that our three Archbishops sent out a pastoral letter offering their thoughts on some of the more important issues we might wish to have in mind when we voted at the General Election. This prompted a critique, complete with some alternative suggestions, from Dr Bonnie Miller Perry, a former senior executive of the World Bank in Washington and now living in Central Otago, which was published in the ODT on 8th September. Dr Miller Perry described the Archbishops' effort as "a fairly predictable list of good thoughts", before offering "an alternative set, hopefully a little more practical and focused, arising from biblical descriptions of Jesus' teaching and actions".
Item 2 on her list read as follows:
Jesus expressed strong views concerning efficiency in business and return on capital. (Parable of the Talents) We need to recognise that more efficient businesses, with greater productivity and lower burden of taxation, will benefit all in society.
At the other extreme, this from Robert Farrar Capon (The Parables of Judgment, p.167):
"[The parable] emphatically does not say that God is a bookkeeper looking for productive results. The only bookkeeper in the parable is the servant who decided he had to fear a non-existent audit and who therefore hid his one talent in the ground."
Tempting though it is, I do not intend to enter into that particular debate today, because I have found a much more interesting approach to this parable following the high drama that has played out – indeed, saturated – our news media this week. I am referring, of course, to the "escape" of Philip Smith (Traynor), the convicted murderer and paedophile, and, more particularly, to the rabid desire of the media to sit in judgment (or rather, to punish, without the need for prior judgment) all those responsible for granting this man leave in the first place. So much have they enjoyed this public bloodletting on their part that I suspect they may even regret that Mr Smith has been re-captured so quickly, thereby taking the heat out of the story.
What's all this to do with the Parable of the Talents? Well, this is a summary of how the Smith saga and the parable meshed as I reflected on this week's readings. The servants are the staff of the Corrections Department. The talents are the inmates. The inmates are entrusted to the servants, who are instructed by the Master (The Law, made on our behalf by our House of Representatives, and applied in practice by our duly appointed judges) to do two things: to detain them, and to prepare them for release from detention when (in the case of an indeterminate sentence – a life sentence or preventive detention) the Parole Board decides that they are safe to release. With me so far?
Okay, the servants invest their time and talents in trying to get these inmates (who, by the very nature of their sentences, are going to be among the most serious of all offenders) ready for ultimate release. We know from the present case that there is a gradual process, begun only after many years of confinement (the punitive part of the sentence) has been served, involving very short periods of release. In Mr Smith's case, on at least 6 occasions he was granted leave for a matter of a few hours. Each time he complied. Then on at least 3 occasions he was granted overnight leave, and again on each occasion he complied. Then he was granted 72 hours' leave and he absconded.
So this particular "investment" turned sour. Unfortunately, the parable does not tell us what the Master's attitude would have been had one of the servants lost money on one of his investments; but do we really believe that he would have responded with the same fury that he showed towards the hapless servant who was so terrified of getting it wrong that he kept his "talent" under lock and key and refused to take any risks?
Of course, we can do what the media is so good at and hide from the principle by burying ourselves in the details. Why didn't he have to wear an electronic bracelet? Were the sponsors adequately checked out? Shouldn't checks have been made earlier? Shouldn't the alarm have been raised earlier? Shouldn't the victims have been notified earlier? All good questions deserving of answers. But the principle remains the same. The Master could have said to the servants, keep these inmates locked up for the rest of their lives: do not let them out at any time for any reason. That would have been the safest course of action. That would have ensured that Mr Smith would not have got to Auckland Airport, let alone Chile and Brazil. But the Master did not tell that: he told them to do what they did – and now they are being roasted for their obedience. "You wicked and incompetent servants! You knew, did you..."
And the question now is, how will our servants in the Corrections Department carry out their duties in future? Will they continue to invest their time and talents in trying to prepare those who have been entrusted to their safe-keeping for their ultimate release back into our community (which is what their Master on our behalf says they should do), or will they now realise that their Master is a hard man, blaming them when things go wrong, and claiming all the credit for himself when things go right, and follow the example of the third servant in the parable?
And by the way, it's just 6 weeks to Christmas, when we celebrate the Incarnation – a.k.a. The Greatest Risk Ever Taken.
Zephaniah 1:7, 14-18. Yes, well, it's hard to do anything other than accept the admonition in verse 7, "Be silent before the Lord God!" Perhaps we need reminding from time to time why "salvation" is needed – what we are being saved from. Call it the wrath of God, as Zephaniah and the other prophets did, or the inevitable consequences of human greed and exploitation, as we might be more inclined to call it today, the end result is the same. Either we change our ways or we doom ourselves and the rest of creation with us. Salvation is the process by which, in and through Christ, we are given the opportunity to change our ways by being changed in ourselves.
Taking It Personally.
· Spend some time in silence before the Lord. Try not to engage with any thoughts that come to you. Be at peace.
· When you are ready, read slowly through this passage. Monitor your feelings.
· What comes to mind? Images from the First World War, perhaps, or from the TV News from any number of war zones around the world?
· Are they images of God's wrath in action, or of the inhumanity of humanity writ large?
· Are we powerless to do anything about the state of the world as it is today? If not, what can we do?
1 Thessalonians 5:1-11. St Paul is reaching the end of this letter to the faithful in Thessalonica. As we noted last week they were very much focussed on the End Times, and the Return of Christ. St Paul reminds them now that no one knows exactly when it will happen; the important thing is to be ready when it does, not simply as individuals, but as a community of faithful people. They are to live as children of light, and to encourage and build up one another.
Taking It Personally.
· Start with verse 9: memorise it.
· Begin each day for a week by reciting, "today may be the day of the Lord's return". At the end of the week, reflect on any difference this practice may have made to your attitude or behaviour during the week.
· Have you encouraged and built up anyone this week? Has anyone encouraged and built you up this week?
Matthew 25:14-30. Although this is a "self-contained" parable, it reads as a continuation of a long passage of teaching that began back in chapter 14:4. It is another "absent-Master" case study, and seems to be a variation of the same story that appears in Luke's gospel (19:11-27) as the Parable of the Coins (or "Pounds" as it now called in the NSRV). The details in Matthew's version are interesting. The key word in the opening verses seems to be "entrusted" – the man "entrusted" his property to his slaves/servants. The terms of the trust are not spelled out; although he allots different amounts to each of them "according to his ability". So perhaps the implication is there that they are to do something with the money. The first two "traded" with the money entrusted to them and made the same rate of return, 100% in each case. The third guy was terrified of the master's wrath if he should make a loss and so played safe, conserving the capital but not increasing it. The Master was fulsome in his praise of the entrepreneurial twosome, and in his condemnation of the nervous nerd. At the very least the guy should have put it on short term deposit with a reputable bank. The fact that the master received back the single talent from the nerd and immediately gave it away shows that he was not interested in the money itself, but only in what it showed about their attitude towards him. The first two sought to do their best for the master, prepared to take a risk and rely on his understanding and fairness if the market went against them. The other guy valued self-preservation over service to his master.
Taking It Personally.
· Which of the servants is most like you? Are you a natural risk-taker, or is safety-first your guiding principle? (Think about the Good Samaritan here, perhaps.) Can you recall a recent occasion when the fear of "getting it wrong" held you back from doing or saying something you now wish you had done or said?
· Remind yourself that this story is set in the Temple in Holy Week. What difference does that make to your understanding of the parable?
· Notice the reference in verse 19 to "a long time"? What do you make of that?
No comments:
Post a Comment