Parable Draft #1

In the Parable of the Talents, Jesus says that in order to end oppression, there must be a joint effort by people of all hierarchal standings to stop the exploiter with all the power. According to Gottwald, the system exploiting the peasant farmers in first century Palestine is called a Tributary Mode of Production, or TMP. A TMP consists of the dominant bearing class (exploited) and the dominant imposing class (exploiters). While the peasants worked hard making produce, the dominant imposing class siphoned off surplus to three different groups: foreign powers, the state, and the elites who own the peasant’s land.1 It is an aristocrat of a household who is an antagonist in the parable. Herzog explains the role of the household and the relationships between the elite aristocrat, the retainers, and the peasants. The household was in charge of harvesting, gathering into storage, redistributing or monetizing, and exporting the wealth of the land. This required the handling of large sums of money, often counted in talents. When the elite would travel on business, he would leave this money in the safekeeping of his most trusted servants, or retainers. The retainers were then under an unspoken agreement, as demonstrated in the parable, that once they doubled the wealth in their charge they could keep the rest earned. This lead to the heavy exploitation of the peasant class. The peasant audience that Jesus tells the parable to knows this about the system and the characters.2

The parable’s meaning is straightforward: the elite rewards the retainers who doubled the talents given while he punishes the one who only returns the original amount of wealth entrusted to him. Herzog says that the retainer’s banishment to the status of a day laborer was not only for failing to exploit the peasants, but also for being a "whistle-blower." The third retainer knew that for calling the aristocrat out on his exploitive and unfair doings, he would have a price to pay. But, by acting alone the retainer fails to change anything and also dies alone. This tells the audience that even the higher class people cannot overthrow oppression by themselves.3

This creates a new question for the peasants. If one of the oppressor’s elite cannot stop exploitation by acting alone, and we the exploited cannot act alone, how can we overcome the system? Herzog answers this question by stating that the peasants’ animosity toward the retainers helps the ruling oppressor. The peasants’ hatred for this class of people is shown when the servant is thrown outside into the darkness. Darkness suggests solitude and no sympathy from the peasant class with whom he now lives. The interests of the peasants are tied to the very class of people whom they are shunning in this parable. What could happen if both classes worked together?4

If the exploited and the exploiters worked together, the person at the top of the pyramid of power would be isolated. The exploiters would no longer contribute power to the system from the oppressed, and the oppressed would not allow the oppressor to punish the rebelling exploiters. Unable to obtain any more power with the death of the circle of exploitation, the oppressor would no longer be able to do harm. By teaching the peasants that they must collaborate with their enemies to end exploitation, Jesus also shows us that today the only way to eliminate problems is to create a joint effort of all parties involved. To overcome the enemy, we must work with the enemy.

Norman K. Gottwald, "Social Class as an Analytic and Hermeneutical Category in Biblical Studies," Journal of Biblical Literature 112:1 (1993), 3-22.
Walter Herzog, Parables as Subversive Speech: Jesus as the Pedagogue of the Oppressed (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1994), 156-159.
Ibid., 162-167.
Ibid., 167-168.

Essential Q&A

Q: How do you stop the system of exploitation involving classes?

A: People from 2 different social classes need to see that their interests lie together and that if they work together they will prosper and no longer be able to be exploited by the oppressor. If they work together they can overthrow the oppressor. People need to work together collaboratively to overthrow an oppressor.

Parable Documentation

1. Look at the title and consider its implications, then read and write down all facts to understand surface plot line.
The title "parable of the talents" refers to a form of monetary measurement that was used by the elite during the times of Jesus. A talent was the amount an average worker earned in 15 years. This was the largest way to count money and was used only by the wealthy and the elite.
Details:
Man goes on journey and entrusts property to them.= The man is wealthy because he is travelling while most people stayed close to village. The servants are trusted because he is leaving his property to them

The man gives three servants talents based on their ability= the man is wealthy because his servants have their own hierarchy. This was required to run a powerful household of the elite

The servants with 5 and ten talents go to work at once and double what they have been entrusted with= The servants went to work right away because once they reached the "understanding" of gaining a 100%profit for their master, they could begin to gain money for themselves. Therefore, they must have been exploiting the peasant population profusely.

Man with one talent digs a hole and places his master's money in there= He is keeping the money safe. It also takes the money out of the circle of exploiting the peasants. The money cannot be doubled which would then allow the master to continue to exploit the peasants for more money

After a long time the master comes to settle accounts with the servants= Servants had a long time to exploit the peasants and the master is expecting payment.

Man with five talents tells master he has earned 5 more= he has made a 100 percent profit for his master

Master says "well done good and faithful servant. you have been faithful with a few things. I will put you in charge of many things. Come and share in your master's happiness!"= The master is pleased at how able the servant was able to exploit more money. He will be rewarded with more responsibility and a greater chance for him to achieve personal gain. The last statement suggests he is becoming more tied to the aristocrat and distances the servant from the peasants.

Repeat reaction for the man who doubled the 2 talents= sets up the listener to expect the third servant to do the same as the first 2

3rd servant says "you are a hard man"= Servant is a "whistle blower" calling the aristocrat out on his cold immorality

"Harvesting what you have not sown and gathering where you have not scattered seed"= the master exploits the working class to earn money for his own high lifestyle

Man returns the talent he his in the ground= The man is showing the master that he is honorable because he kept the money safe and is returning it to him

You wicked, lazy servant! So you knew that I harvest where I have not sown and gather where I have not scattered seed? 27Well then, you should have put my money on deposit with the bankers, so that when I returned I would have received it back with interest. = king denounces the integrity of what the servant has just said by calling him wicked and lazy. Does not deny that he exploits the peasants because he sees his lifestyle as acceptable.

The servant is thrown into the darkness to weep and gnash his teeth= the servant is banished to where he is alone because the household and the peasants do not accept him

2. Research to understand the social class/context of characters in first century Palestine.
Household= the basic part of Palestine. It was a place that controlled the harvest and exports of the neighboring workers. The household was run by the elite, who needed servants to help run their large organizations. The more servants, the more powerful and wealthy the aristocrat of the household. Servants often had their own hierarchical rankings to keep order. The servants in the story are more like retainers. They would be in charge of the aristocrat's affairs while he was gone and there was an underlying understanding that they would earn money for their masters in their absence. The peasants knew that the servants exploited their people to earn their own money. A tributary mode of production (TMP) was in place in 1st century Palestine. It consists of the exploiters and the exploited, with the produce centered on land. The exploited had the surplus products, but because of the TMP three main groups exploited the peasant farmers through various means. The state took surplus in forms of taxation and corvee. The elites took produce with interest and rental fees for farminf their land. Finally foreign powers took produce a "tribute" in the form of higher taxes.
3. Find main character and why.
The main character is the third servant because he is a hero. He sees that his class needs to help the peasant class if the peasants are ever going to stop being exploited. He knows he will be punished for "blowing the whistle" on the king, but he can no longer take part in the immoral cycle of profit gain. The audience is surprised by the third retainer's boldness to confront the aristocrat and at the harshness of his punishment.
4. What is the conflict that Jesus is addressing?
Jesus is addressing the conflict of the exploitation of the peasants. He tells them that they must seek and accept the help of the retainers that they hate in order to ever get away from oppression. The heart of class conflict is the exploitation of surplus labor.
5. Interpret every detailed fact in parable and why characters acted the way they did (w/o allegorizing)
See number 1 after =
6. Look before and after in Bible to see immediate context of parable
Before, Jesus talks about his coming crucifixion. After, the process for Jesus' crucifixion takes place. This refers to what the peasants have to do after Jesus is gone in order to achieve the Kingdom of heaven
7. What is Jesus' message about the kingdom of God/life/ WHAT IS CORE VALUE?
Jesus' core massage is that sometimes in order to achieve something one has to work with your "enemies". It teaches that we must work with the "bad people" in order to change bad circumstances. The oppressed class cannot act alone. The parable also raises the consciousness of the peasants and shows that the exploiters are responsible for the destruction of society.
8. Apply to current event.

Research Citation

Northcott, Michael S. "The parable of the talents and the economy of the gift." Theology 107.838 (July-August 2004): 241-9. General OneFile. Gale. St Marys High School (BAISL). 13 Nov. 2007 .

Herzog

I. The Retainers of Great Households (Important because setting of story is in the household of an urban elite)
A. The Place of the Household in the Ancient World
1. Ancient world organized into the household, the city, the kingdom
a. Basic household was made up of people by whom the wealth of the land was controlled
b. Cities were made up of groupings of households, and kingdoms were made up of groupings of cities
B. Household Bureaucracies and Their Retainers
1. System depends on the household, so lead aristocrats needed their own bureaucracies within the household
a. Organized hierarchally, a larger household staff meant more power
b. In a master’s absence, (they had to travel a lot), duties were left up to trusted retainers
I. Relationship was similar to king and court bureaucrat, if retainer kept his head low he could benefit in wealth by doing king’s dirty work
II. The Nobleman and his Retainers
A. The Distribution of Wealth
1. Fact that man is traveling and a presence of staff makes him wealthy
a. Only wealthy could afford to travel at all during the time, most people remained close to villages
b. Staff was ranked in hierarchal fashion, hence phrase "to each according to his ability"
2. The aristocrat is not testing staff
a. 1 talent is 15 years wages of working man, so aristocrat must trust even the man with 1 talent a great deal due to previous tests
b. Does provide an opportunity for each retainer to improve his status
B. The Business Venture
1. The three servants have convertible assets
a. No agreement is made between the master and his retainers except the distribution of talents
I. At time, understanding was that there would be a profit of 100 percent at least
2. Retainers gain "honest graft"
a. First two retainers get to work quickly, because once they double the master’s money they can keep the rest for themselves
b. This benefits master because the retainers do his dirty work and shift anger away from the aristocratic class.
c. Only way for retainers to benefit is by exploiting the peasant people
I. Retainers moved peasants from their plots of land so elites could control crops to earn more money (like with vineyards) without the protests of peasants
C. The Reckoning
1. Two servants prove to be good exploiters
a. Return with the correct profit and please their master
b. Each retainer receives a higher position in the client’s household, thus becoming more dependent on the client
2. The third servant is a "whistle-blower"
a. Calls the client out on being a bad person and an exploiter who lives off the labor of others
b. Third servant makes a comment on the aristocrat’s style of life through "gathering sheaves of wheat and winnowing them"
I. "Gather in" suggests conversion of goods to cash, then winnow means to squander on excessive living
3. The aristocrat punishes third servant, but never denies his statement
a. Master views his lifestyle as honorable
b. Third servant does return the original money to the king to show that he is an honorable person
c. Elite labels servant as "wicked" and "lazy" to dismiss his criticism
d. The talent is given to the most productive retainer and the third servant is banished to the role of a day laborer
III. The Codification of the Good Retainer
1. The third servant realizes that he will pay a price, but he would rather do that than continue exploiting
2. At end of the story, he will die alone because he acted alone and will receive little support from the peasants he has oppressed

Interpretation Methodology

1) As you are reading the parable, write down every detail in the story.
2) What question is Jesus answering? What is the proof of of this statement?
3) Based on question 2, who is the main character of the parable? What is the proof for this statement?
4)What is the story's conflict?
5) What seems to be the most important part of the story?
6) Research the details of the story in a social, political, religious, and economic context.
7) Ask questions of the "gaps" in the parable (like unaccounted details and questions raised in the text) and try to answer them with the knowledge gained from question 4.
8) Based on the answers to the previous questions, what was Jesus telling his audience?
9) Based on the answer to number 8, how does this apply to us today?

TABLE's METHOD:


1. Look at the title and consider its implications, then read and write down all facts to understand surface plot line.
2. Research to understand the social class/context of characters in first century Palestine.
3. Find main character and why.
4. What is the conflict that Jesus is addressing?
5. Interpret every detailed fact in parable and why characters acted the way they did (w/o allegorizing)
6. Look before and after in Bible to see immediate context of parable
7. What is JEsus' message about the kingdom of God/life/ WHAT IS CORE VALUE?
8. Apply to current event.

System Examples

Countrywide does nothing to help the Parkinson’s patient because he is not part of their system. Their system is set up to earn money for the employees of Countrywide Loans, not to take care of their customers. The customers may think they are part of the system, but really it is a corporation whose ultimate goal is to make money. They were not receiving money from Lin, so they cut ties with him even at his expense. Being outside of their system, I would say that they should show mercy for the misunderstanding. They could have been more diligent in getting Lin the information since they knew he spoke limited English based on the letter they sent him. Even if they are unable to get him back his own house, they should get him one at the equal price or provide housing for him until the whole matter is sorted out. I see this issue differently from Countrywide because I am outside of the system and have no personal interest at risk. I don’t need to weigh what I need against what is moral.
The Stanford prison experiment is an example of how absolute power corrupts absolutely. The students playing the prisoners had no power at all over their lives, while the prison guards had complete control over them. The inmates ended up being abused and became depressed because the guards were abusing their powers. The guards saw a system set up in which they could benefit without any risk, and they took full advantage of that. This shows that a system set up where an elite group has all the power, they will use it for self-interests rather than the common good.
The Brower Youth Award recipient that I read about is Carlos Moreno. His goal is to combat youth violence in the city of Boston. His theory is that by creating more youth jobs and programs, people will have an outlet to escape the violence and they will feel more a part of the community, thus in turn wanting to improve it themselves. He accomplishes this goal with the creation of an organization that protests, communicates their wants to city officials, and donates money for the cause. I think Carlos is so successful in working outside the system because he has a passion for his goal. Doing all those things requires a leader who is willing to sacrifice much of their own time and interests, so the leader must truly believe in the goal. He also must believe that this problem can be changed, or else he would have given up a long time ago.