Whoever thinks that the Bible has nothing at all to say about the right production, distribution, and consumption of commodities—about the economic policies advocated by God—is just plain wrong!
I mean, in our First Lesson, we find that the economic system created by God to serve the Israelites during their forty years of wandering in the Sinai desert, after their deliverance from slavery in Egypt—we find that that economic system provides folks with just exactly the right amount of food, with just exactly what each person needs for sustenance—no more, and no less! As our text says, "When they measured [the manna] by the omer, those who gathered much had nothing over, and those who gathered little had no shortage; they gathered as much as each of them needed." (Exodus 16:18) No rich, no poor—everyone the same.
And in our Second Lesson, we find that the God-figure whom Jesus creates as the central character in his parable—we find that this "landowner" is one who understands that the meeting of each person's basic need for work, food, home, and clothing is the test for whether an economic policy is just. So, at the end of the workday, this landowner chooses to be generous to those whom no one else had wanted to hire, to those who have worked for him not the full 12-hour day that some of the other laborers have, but just a 1-hour day. The landowner chooses to give these last-hired the exact same denarius—the exact same daily wage—as the first-hired, because a denarius, quite simply put, is the amount of money it takes if a family is to have the food, and the home, and the clothing they need.
You see, these last persons hired by the landowner, at 5 o'clock in the afternoon, had been waiting from early morning till evening, desperately hoping that someone would hire them, for, if not, their families will certainly go hungry. As for the landowner, well, he'd kept going out again and again throughout the day, long after his first trip before 6:00 a.m., searching for those who were still unemployed, for he knew all too well the deprivation they would otherwise experience. And when he came even so late as 5:00 p.m. and asked those who were still unemployed, "Why are you standing here idle all day?" they replied, "Because no one has hired us" (Matthew 20:6-7). We're willing to work. We need to work. But no one has offered us work. And the landowner, recognizing their economic predicament, did indeed hire them, even though there was only one hour left in the workday.
And then, as I said, at the end of that one hour, the landowner—who, you'll remember, is the God-figure in this parable by Jesus—the landowner puts these last-hired first in the pay line and startles everyone there by giving these last-hired the very same full-day's wage that he will give to even the first-hired.
So, among the various and richly diverse meanings that Jesus intends for us to derive from this parable—for every parable has not just one meaning but many—yes, one of the messages that's to be found in our parable is this: a society's economic policies are just only when the basic needs of its unemployed, disabled, poor, and oppressed are being met. For God's justice demands the generosity of a relative equality of income, and that's the economic policy that God advocates. [For commentary on this parable, see T. V. Philip, "The Justice of God (Matthew 20:1-16) www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=1527.]
Now, within the context of our own American economic system, Jesus's parable will strike us as being really strange. For far from there being movement within our system toward an increasing equality of income, there's only movement here toward an increasing inequality of income.
Why, back in 1965—which, admittedly, dates even before one so gray-haired as I had finished my studies and started working—in 1965, the average CEO was making just 24 times as much money as their average worker. 24. But by 2004, that gap had mushroomed to the point that (will you believe it?) the average CEO is now making 430 times as much as their average worker. From 24 times as much, to 430 times as much—that's 18-fold.
And consider this as well. If over just the past 15 years—that is, from 1990 through 2004—our nation's minimum wage had kept increasing at merely the same rate as the salaries of CEO's, then the minimum wage in our nation today would no longer be $5.15 an hour but would instead be (are you ready for this?) $23 an hour. Wow, that's really quite a nice minimum wage!
Instead, over the past 5 years the percentage of people living beneath the poverty line in our society has increased from 11.7% to 12.7%. And in New York City, the percentage currently living below the poverty line is, quite shockingly, 20.3%—1 out of every 5 persons.
Now, the mainstream media in this country are not noted for placing the poor on their front pages—for putting, if you will, the last first. But then, after Hurricane Katrina struck, these media did choose to report, with increasing alarm, the vast needs of the poor, leading the executive officers of five well-known Protestant denominations, including our own, to send to Congress this past Tuesday a letter about budget priorities, saying, "The devastation wrought by Katrina has exposed the anguished faces of the poor in the wealthiest nation on the planet."
President Bush is another one who's not noted for putting the last first, who's not noted for making the needs of the poor a priority. Nor should one expect his party, or any other American party, to adopt anytime soon the slogan being used by a candidate who'll be running in next year's presidential election in Mexico, the slogan: "Los pobres primero—the poor first." Yet just this past week, in two separate speeches, President Bush has shown us the very first signs that he may indeed finally be tuning in—well, at least a little bit—to one of the central teachings of the person who's his favorite philosopher, namely Jesus—the teaching: "So the last will be first, and the first will be last." (Matthew 20:16)
One of these two speeches by President Bush was given here in New York City this past Wednesday, at the gathering of more than 150 heads of state for the convening of the United Nations.
As it was put in a New York Times editorial last Thursday (9/15/05, p. A30): "Let's face it: most Americans wouldn't know a Millennium Development Goal [or] a Monterrey Consensus...if [these] jumped out and hit them in the head. But those phrases have life-or-death importance to more than two billion people around the world who survive on barely anything. And yesterday [Wednesday,] at the United Nations, President Bush used [these phrases] in front of the world." And what good news that is! For "[a]s this week's U.N. summit meeting approached, Mr. Bush's flame-throwing U.N. envoy, John Bolton, [had] struck all mention of the Millennium Development Goals from the text of the agreement the world leaders are supposed to sign. After saner heads prevailed, some of that language was restored, although the agreement remains weak. [But then Wednesday,] Mr. Bush said it clearly: 'We are committed to the Millennium Development Goals' Full stop."
Now, these Millennium Goals aim by the year 2015 to accomplish such ambitious projects as these: reducing the world's cases of extreme poverty and hunger by half; achieving universal primary education; eliminating gender disparities at all levels of education; reducing child mortality rates by 2/3rds; reducing the number of women who die in childbirth by 3/4ths; reducing the number of those without access to safe drinking water by half; reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other major diseases; and constructing global partnerships for development. So, three cheers for Mr. Bush's announcement that he is committed to these goals, because prior to last Wednesday the president seems never to have even uttered the phrase "Millennium Goals." (See The New York Times, 9/15/05, p. A10.]
Now, to continue with the New York Times editorial, "In 2002, many members of the group meeting in New York this week trooped down to Monterrey[, Mexico] to figure out how they were going to pay for the Millennium Development Goals. The text they signed [there] said, 'We urge developed countries that have not done so to make concrete efforts toward the target of 0.7 percent of gross national product as [official development assistance] to developing countries.' The United States, which was rated the world's second-stingiest rich country (behind Italy) by a U.N. report this month, gives just 0.18 percent of its G.N.P. to poorer countries"—that's less than 26% of the targeted goal. We've a long way to go. And recently, this nation had been backing off from the commitment to this goal of 0.7 percent that we made at Monterrey. But then at the U.N., "Mr. Bush said, 'I call on all the world's nations to implement the Monterrey Consensus.' [End of quote.] ['All the world's nations'—that includes], we hope, America." Yes, "These are exactly the right words, and we applaud them. Now, let's get to it. The world is waiting." End of the Times editorial.
And the second of the intriguing speeches made by President Bush this past week was delivered on Thursday night, over national television, from Jackson Square in New Orleans. [The full transcript is on line at: www.nytimes.com/katrina.]
There he uttered these truly remarkable words: "As all of us saw on television, there is also some deep, persistent poverty in this region as well. That poverty has roots in a history of racial discrimination, which cut off generations from the opportunity of America. We have a duty to confront this poverty with bold action. So let us restore all that we have cherished from yesterday and let us rise above the legacy of inequality." Again, words that many of us thought we'd never hear him say, but there they are.
Of course one needs to guard against over-optimism, but as another New York Times editorial observed last Friday [9/16/05, p. A26]: "Mr. Bush's words could begin a much-needed healing process. But that will happen only if they are followed by deeds that are as principled, disciplined and ambitious as Mr. Bush's speech."
Now, words are cheap. It's actions that count. And of course, the big question is not whether New Orleans will be rebuilt, but whose New Orleans will be rebuilt. In planning the reconstruction, will priority be given to the needs of the city's poor, who have suffered most? Will priority be given to the poor, both in the planning and in the hiring for rebuilding? Or will the big winners in all this be the affluent of the city and such suspect corporations as Halliburton, Fluor, and the Shaw Group. As Newsweek writer Jonathan Alter has observed: "Katrina gives [Mr.] Bush [an opportunity—]an only-Nixon-could-go-to-China [kind of] opportunity, if he wants it.... He can limit his legacy to Iraq, the war on terror and tax cuts for the rich—or, if he seizes the moment, he could undertake a midcourse correction that might materially change the lives of millions." Which choice will he make?
Now I want you to round up a pencil and take a few notes for yourself.
The Book of Proverbs instructs us: "Speak out for those who cannot speak, for the rights of all the destitute." (31:8) So to follow up on that biblical injunction, one thing we can do this week is to write the White House and to let the president know which choice we think he should make, to let him know he should put the poor first. We can send that e-mail to: president@whitehouse.gov.
And beside writing to the president, what else can we do this week to join with Jesus in helping to put the last first?
Well, if you want to follow up on fighting global poverty, you can go to the following web site: www.sojo.net. And next, in the box for searching the site type: "Katrina Pledge." Then you'll have the chance to read the following: "As a person of faith, I believe that the poverty we have witnessed on the rooftops of New Orleans and in the devastated communities of the Gulf Coast is morally unacceptable. Therefore, I join my fellow Americans across the barriers of race, religion, class, and politics in the following commitments:
- I pledge to be personally involved in helping those whose lives have been affected by this natural disaster.
- I pledge to work for sweeping change of our nation's priorities."
Again, you can read and sign that pledge by going to: www.sojo.net, and then searching the site for: "Katrina Pledge."
Well, these are just a few suggestions for action. Now, we don't all need to do these particular things, but we do all need to become deadly serious about joining with Jesus in putting the last first!
Let us pray:
O God, we do want to make poverty history. So give us the courage to speak to our friends and neighbors and to our political leaders. And give us the resolve to become advocates on behalf of the poor. Then take our efforts, and multiply them into change. Amen.