Reflection - Part 2

By Steve Hall

https://bible.usccb.org/bible/readings/082821.cfm
I Thessalonians 4:9-11
Matthew 25:14-30

We read or hear the word ‘talent’ and our thoughts readily turn to coins. After all, that is the stated meaning of talent in this parable. Alternately, the notion of inclination, aptitude or gift may come to mind as we consider that the ‘talents’ are given or entrusted to the servants in the story. But this is a parable; and, in the structure of Matthew’s Gospel, it is one of three parables about the end times when the king returns.

The first parable of the three tells of the wise and the foolish virgins, some of whom brought extra oil for their lamps and others who did not. The image can be understood better with a brief description of the classical Jewish wedding.

Toward the end of a year long betrothal period, the bride waited with great expectancy for the groom to come and for the ceremony to take place. Even late in the evening the bride and her wedding party would keep their oil lamps burning in case it was time for the wedding.

But the day of the ceremony was a surprise to both the groom and the bride. When the bridegroom was asked the date of the wedding he could only say something like “No man knows except my father.”

When the time was right, the groom’s father would issue his approval for the wedding ceremony to begin. The groom and his wedding party would leave the groom’s house to go get the bride. The friends of the bridegroom would shout “Behold, the bridegroom comes.”

The primary purpose of the wedding feast was to honor the groom.

The third of the end time parables describes the scene after the king has finally come. It’s image is that of the shepherd separating the sheep from the goats, certainly an image well known to us, as is the teaching — ‘be a sheep, not a goat.’

So the overall structure of this portion of Matthew’s Gospel reveals three parts. The first is that we should always be prepared for the return of the king, the bridegroom. The third reflects on the necessity to have lived in accord with the teachings of Christ: “for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, etc. . . . “ 

What of the second, the one to which we have been directed today? Is it, like the first, a caution to be prepared? While the master does return unexpectedly, that does not seem to be the point of the story. Is it like the third, a reminder of what we should be doing in the interim between now and the day of the king’s arrival? Well, that’s probably a ’yes’ and a ‘no’, as the focus clearly is directed toward the handling of the talents, and, somewhat mysteriously, the rewards or punishment that followed. I say mysterious because it seems a bit strange that the man should be so severely punished for doing nothing. The most common interpretation is one we have frequently heard. It would be along this line of thought.

The parable of the Talents is about stewardship. It warns against the dangers of sloth, whereby God-given blessings and abilities are squandered because of fear (25:25) and laziness (25:26-28). Personal diligence, however, is greatly rewarded with superior gifts and responsibilities (25:21, 23). Accountability to Christ entails risk and challenges; God's endowments must be invested in and for the good of others to increase heavenly earnings. 

It seems to me that there are lots of legitimate reasons why a person might not reach his/her full potential, laziness and fear being among them. Moreover, such an interpretation seems somewhat awkward because it puts Jesus’ teaching in line with that old army commercial: “Be all that you can be.” Jesus just doesn’t come across as a self-help cheerleader. As I thought about it, I began to wonder if a different meaning altogether wasn’t implied.

Matthew tells us that this story is a parable. By definition that means that there is a singular point to the story and that the elements should not be given allegorical meanings. However, that has not stopped those writing interpretations or delivering homilies from telling us what the ‘talents’ represent or how to understand both the rewards and the punishments. Such being the case, I feel comfortable offering a different perspective; one which, it seems to me, would more properly fit Jesus’ general teaching and one tied directly to the very purpose of our existence.

I’m not a Pope Francis or a Bishop Barron.

I’m not a Francis of Assisi or a Mother Teresa.

I’m not an Isaac Jogues or a Maximilian Kolbe.

Throughout history some are given the character, the personality and the opportunity to be great and inspiring Saints. To put that another way: Throughout history some are given the character, the personality and the opportunity to give great glory to God and to be an inspiration to others to do the same. But there are many others who give or have given glory to God in the simplicity of their lives and in the observance of his teaching. How each person responds to the ‘talents’ he has been given with which to glorify God seems to me the primary thrust of the parable. 

Some, like Pope Francis, Francis of Assisi and Maximilian Kolbe have been given ten ‘talents’; and by incorporating those talents most completely in their lives, they not only give glory to God, they also inspire others to do the same and will lead others in he glorification of God throughout eternity. Others, because of genetics, or environment, or upbringing, or personality or even life circumstances are given less. But that doesn’t alter the fundamental Covenant duty to glorify the Father in such way as to encourage others to do the same. Even the servant who receives the minimum must do the same. That is why, in the parable, that servant is described as wicked, lazy and useless. At least one of these three prevented him from giving glory to God.

Not all of us have what it takes to be historically notable saints. Not all of us can inspire the world’s population or subsequent generations. Only a few have what it takes to keep the wonders of our God ever present before the eyes of the world. Yet all are at minimum intended to be historically un-notable saints, using however much or however little our existence as brought so as to glorify our Father.