εὐαγγελίζω (euaggelizo)
“to announce the Good News of victory in battle”
“But when the king came in to meet the guests,
he saw a man there not dressed in a wedding garment.
The king said to him, 'My friend, how is it
that you came in here without a wedding garment?”
Matthew 22:11-12
Twenty-eighth Sunday in Ordinary Time
Is there anything in the text we just heard that raises a concern?” A king dispatches servants to gather all who have been invited to his son’s wedding feast. People excuse themselves not once, but twice and even with mind-boggling violence. Since the preparations for the festival are complete, the king instructs another batch of servants to get anyone, both the good and the bad, and bring them to the feast. Yet when one shows up without a wedding garment, he is not only removed from the feast but bound hand and foot and cast outside because of improper attire. Even if we understand the significance of the wedding garment, the sense of the text suggests that there may not have been time for this person to don such a garment. So, what’s up with the white garment?
Many biblical scholars suggest that knowledge of first-century Jewish wedding practices is essential to assist in the salvific meaning of the parable. Scholars also acknowledge that we do not have all the relevant information to have a complete or big-picture view of the wedding feast celebrated in this era. We do know that once a couple married-but-before-they-lived-together (what we would call today a ‘formal engagement’) plans were ‘officially’ set in motion for the eventual day of the bride moving into a home (or room) prepared by her husband and his family. The marriage and its announcement (again, in biblical times this was the commitment but a couple did not live together at this point) came after the families (i.e. fathers) worked out the terms of marriage for their children, especially the daughter. When the marriage was announced, the couple was committed (or espoused) to each other. In terms of our culture, they could not ‘see’ or date other people. The groom, guided by his father, began the necessary work of building a home or adding a room onto the family home for his bride. He enlisted the help of family, friends, and skilled people to make all ready. Others in the town made preparations for the wedding festival. Some would prepare food, some would hope that their wine would be ready while others took care to have a suitable place for the celebration. The bride for her part lived in a state of expectation not knowing the exact day when all would be ready. She and her friends lived in anticipation of the groom’s voice announcing that all preparations were complete and his bride could now come to live with him. When all was ready, the groom (or his father) announced to the town that all was set for the wedding. The bride’s father then escorted her to the new home and she was handed-over to her husband. As the bride was carried over the threshold of the door (marking the start of living together) the celebration began throughout the town. The festivities could last as long as a week, or until the wine ran out – an embarrassment for sure if this happen too early (cf. Cana, John 2). As for the matter of the wedding garment, scant and sketchy historical data suggests that this was a garment worn particularly by those who had a close role in the proximate preparations for the arrival of the bride. Some data suggests that the wedding garment was the change of clothing marking a transition from preparatory work to festive celebration. Especially for those involved in the last-minute preparations for the bride’s move to her new home, the wedding garment was a refreshing way of leaving behind the work and entering into the celebration.
Biblical exegetes note that this parable has much in common with the parables of previous Sundays. The theme of ‘gift offered, gift rejected and gift given to another people’ surfaces once again this Sunday. Similar to past weeks, we do not want to lapse into a mentality where we as humans decide a person’s or a people’s eternal destiny. There is only one Person who alone will do that – God the Father. But the “wedding garment” is the ‘sticky’ element this week. Why does its absence cause someone to be violently and quickly booted from the festival? Some have mentioned in passing that the garment is a symbol.
When it comes to symbol in the Scriptures, there is no better authority than the Fathers of the Church (and a few Ancient Christian Writers, Origen of Alexandria the notable bright-star in the group.) The Fathers of the Church knew how to “do” symbol in the reading and proclamation of Sacred Scripture. Too often people believe symbol is a fake reality or a license giving free rein as to the Text’s meaning. In these cases symbol is often an opinion that does violence to the literal sense of the Sacred Text.
As for this week’s Parable, a few Fathers of the Church offer insight on the whole episode, but Saints Augustine and Gregory the Great amply address the wedding garment. A good deal of Patristic commentary notes the variety of people invited to the banquet and all the people – good and bad – who come to the banquet as a result of the ‘last round-up’ commanded by the King. Since the Fathers of the Church often view the many banquets and feasts in the Scriptures as an image of the Kingdom of God, Saint Augustine and company comment that the parable is hope-filled: all are invited to the banquet and some at the festival might even be somewhat unsavory. The point is that nobody came to the banquet as a result of her or his initiative. No one ‘earned’ a place or a seat at the banquet. All were invited as pure gift hence equality among all the guests be they rich or poor, good or bad. All are equal in the eyes of the Inviter. But for the Fathers, especially Saints Augustine and Gregory the Great, the universal invitation is not without a requirement. Both view the banquet as the Church and Baptism as the ‘door’ through which the invitation to the Church is opened. However, the baptized must be clothed in the garment of Christian love. Since a wedding is a joining, the garment expressive of that joining must reflect the essence of that union – love. Saint Augustine further comments that this love is none other than the sacrificial love of Jesus Christ Himself. That love – the wedding garment, that is THE CROSS – must be worn by the baptized 24/7/365.
With these insights it is possible to conclude that the wedding garment speaks of a reality deeper than our good or bad actions. The wedding garment speaks of an underlying attitude or manner of life that is sacrificial in nature. This is especially needed in our culture of moral relevance and goodness. How many times do we hear, ‘Oh, well, you know … she or he (or me, of course!) is a good person.’ An exceptionally vague concept of goodness has become the epitome of life and it is a goodness that is often self-defined. The Christian is not called to goodness but holiness grounded in Jesus’ sacrificial death. Our thinking, speaking and acting must go beyond a vague, self or societal construct of convenient goodness. The wedding garment – especially for the baptized and those who consider themselves good – is the challenge to think, to speak and to act sacrificially: the essence of love lived Personally by Jesus Christ Who died that we might enjoy the festivities of the Banquet His Father summons us to in the Holy Spirit.
Collect
Almighty ever-living God,
Who in the abundance of Your kindness
surpass the merits and desires
of those who entreat You,
pour out Your mercy upon us
to pardon what conscience dreads and
to give what prayer does not dare to ask.
Through our Lord Jesus Christ, Your Son,
Who lives and reigns with You
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
God, for ever and ever
Glory to the Father
and to the Son
and to the Holy Spirit:
as it was in the beginning,
is now, and will be forever. Amen
