This section of the gospel of Matthew focuses on Jesus teachings in the form of stories called parables. These parables are designed to help his audience understand the Kingdom of heaven. Jesus explains his use of parables in reading dubbed "The purpose of parables" (Matthew 13:10 –16). The reading states that when asked why Jesus teaches in parables Jesus answers, "Because knowledge of heaven has been granted to you but to them it has not been granted… this is why I speak to them in parables, because they look but do not see and hear but do not listen to understand." (Matthew 13). In the two preceding chapters, parables serve as varied commentary on the rejection of Jesus by the Pharisees The explanation of the Parable of the Weeds and the Parable of the Net thrown into the Sea "which collects fish of every kind" shows that the church of Jesus is composed of both the righteous and the wicked. The separation of the two will be made only at the time of the final judgment.
This pericope has been divided appropreately. That is, the section of the gospel demonstrates Jesus’ message through parables, and focuses on the main Idea that the kingdom of heaven is like a field that grows both wheat and weeds. With the good there is also the evil, good being the wheat and the evil being the weeds. The kingdom of heaven alone will separate the righteous from the wicked accepting the righteous to enter the kingdom of heaven chosen to enter the kingdom of heaven. There is question about whether or not to include Matthew 13: 36-43 which is Jesus’ explanation of the Parable of the Weeds. For the sake of producing more exegetical information and increase depth of investigation, Matt 13: 36-43 will be included when it can help shed more light onto the exegetical situation. Also in including Matt 13: 36-43 the reader gains a better explanation of the teaching and develops a better grasp of the applied issues.
Gospel of Matthew was written in Antioch. Antioch was capital of the Roman province of Syria and was located in the northern half of the province in modern day Turkey. At the time the population of Antioch consisted of a mix of Greek speaking Jews and Gentiles. The church of Matthew was originally Jewish Christian and over time had developed into a predominantly Gentile Christian community. As the population of Gentile Christians grew more and more tension was created among the two sects of Christians.
The Gospel of Matthew was written to spread the good news of the teachings of Christ. The purpose of Parables have been discussed before, Jesus chooses to teach using them because he is trying to connect with the common man. Through out the gospel of Matthew Jesus’ parables are structured to appeal to the common middle class man. They deal with areas of labor such as fishing and agriculture and universal household items such as bushels and candles. These teachings are not focused on the homeless nor the rich. Not once does use language or concepts that would be hard for his common man/woman audience to grasp. Since it is Matthew’s goal to effectively relay these parables to his audience he holds true to the concepts and language that would appeal to the common middle class man.
As stated earlier, like all gospels, Matthew’s is hard to date but it is believed that it was most likely written between 80 and 90 c.e. This date puts it after the Jewish revolt against the Roman Empire and the destruction of the Temple. At this time organizing and composing Church structure was crucial and there were mixed opinions amongst the Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians in the city of Antioch. The fact that Matthew deals with these problematic situations in his gospel supports the widely held belief that it was written near the end of the first century. This interplay between the Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians during this time is easily structured into Matthew’s gospel, and is reflected in many of his teachings.
There is no other Parable of the weeds in the Gospel of Mark, Luke, nor in the gospel of John. That is, there is no other parable in the canonical gospels which related weeds and wheat to the kingdom of heaven. This being so, there are similar parables entitled "The Parable of the Sower" in the gospels of Mark and Luke which use the same agricultural concepts and like the parable of the weeds is followed by an explanation from Jesus. While both parables deal with different types of people, and what separates the people entering the Kingdom of god from the people who are not, the Parable of the Sower does not have the same overtones of the creation of evil or of just judgment as the parable of the weeds has.
The fact that The Parable of the Weeds is unique to Matthew’ Gospel provokes the question: "what sources did Matthew use in writing his Gospel?" It is agreed that the gospel of Mark is the main source of Matt’s gospel, "Overall, Matt is remarkably faithful to Mark, almost as a scribe copying his source" (Brown p.204). Matt did however make a few changes to Mark’s gospel in order to level the social playing field, Matt omitted sections of marked that seemed to favor one class or another. Also, Matt ‘s view of Jesus is more sensible and unified, unlike Mark’s Jesus where at times can seem superstitious or even foolish, e.g. Matt has omitted sections in mark where Jesus speaks with forces of nature (Mk 4:38), or when Jesus seems frazzled or disoriented (Mk 5:30-31). The use of the Q source in Matt accounts for the uniqueness of the parable of the weeds. Scholars believe that Matt used Q, which is believed to be a collection of Jesus’ sayings, to stress Jesus’ strength as a teacher. Matt does not simply copy Q as he did with Mark , rather Matt edited the sayings in Q to fit into sermons and discourses i.e. The Parable of the weeds. There are sections in Matt that can not be attributed to Mark or Q, these sections are said to be the product of the special Matthean source, unique to Matt’s gospel alone, called M. The actual substance of M is widely debated among Biblical scholars. It is hard to tell how much of the M material is from an actual source and how much was a product of Matt’s own teachings and creativity. Since further discussion of this mysterious source would require another essay altogether and the fact that it does not seriously pertain to the Parable of the Weeds, the discussion of M will be left at that.
The language used in the Parable of the Weeds is full of imagery and must not be taken for face value. If one where to do so you would risk loosing much of the richness and the sincerity of Jesus’ words. It is easy to just call this a nice story with a good message and leave it at that. But this is way more than a nice story. The Parable of the Weeds deals with serious social issues such as non-violence and abortion; all these messages are hidden in Matt’s diction.
The most important term used in this parable is the term "weed." These are not your ordinary lawn weed or dandelion, we’re talkin' massive, suffocating, killer weeds. As a farmer in the days of Matt, if you had weeds in your crop your livelihood could be at stake. Weeds had the power to destroy an entire crop, thus cutting off all income to the farmer and his family. What these weeds would do is tangle themselves up in the existing wheat roots and strangle them to death. The only way to rid your self of weeds is to pull them out of the ground, but in doing so you risk pulling your wheat crop out of the ground as well. What is a farmer to do? "Trust in God," says Matt. Jesus teaches us not to pull the weeds, for it is not worth loosing the good wheat, instead wait till harvest time and separate the harvested wheat from the weeds. In Matt the wheat represents the people of God, His own creation; the weeds represent evil in the world which was created from the evil one. Jesus makes this very clear that evil is not a creation of God. Harvest represents the judgment day and the separation represents the judgment.
Here is where all the social issues fit into the mix. If we as good humans were to go and attempt to kill off all evil it would not be possible to do so without sacrificing the lives of innocent people. Therefore it is not it to try to destroy evil through violence. This reading also speaks to the Churches beliefs on innocent lives and can be applied to the pro-choice movement with in the church and the Church’s stance on nuclear war. All that from one little word!
This pericope says that the one who sowed the good seed is the Son of Man. The weeds are the sons of the evil one. The harvest is the end of the age and the inauguration of the future kingdom of the exalted Jesus (Kingsbury, 71). The angels will be used to weed out those who cause sin and who do evil. These evil ones will be thrown into the fiery furnace and the righteous will shine. The main idea of this passage, according to Daniel Harrington is expressed when he says, "The parable of the grain and the weeds uses another agricultural comparison to explain the lack of universal acceptance of Jesus’ preaching" (Harrington, 55). Harrington makes this statement and realizes that the desire of the author to the audience is to accept the teachings of Jesus. Kingsbury also states what he feels is the main idea of this parable. He says, "The major point of the parable of the tares is that darnel and wheat are to be allowed to grow side by side until the harvest" (Kingsbury, 71). In this passage, the audience is suppose to realize that at the end of the age, the angels will come and pick out all those who are not righteous and they will be thrown into hell. Those that are righteous will be the ones to escape the punishment of hell and shine like the sun in heaven. The audience should realize that if they are not righteous, they will be thrown into the fiery furnace.
The author says in the explanation of the parable of the weeds, "He who has ears, let him hear"(Mt 13:43). The author’s aim is to inform his audience that if they are not righteous and do not follow the Son of Man, but rather, the evil one, they will be thrown into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Harrington states, "The parable concerns the proper attitude toward the mixed reception accorded to Jesus" (Harrington, 58). The author wants his audience to hear this parable and to have a change in attitude and understand the meaning of it so that they can realize the consequences of their actions. Harrington also feels that the advice to the audience is particularly important and that the audience should act a certain way. He says, "And so the advice is tolerance and patience until God renders his definitive decision" (Harrington, 58). The author reports that if his audience would follow this that they will shine.
The author offers two different consequences for his audience. He makes this passage persuasive by saying that those that are righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of the Father (Mt 13:43). When the parable is told in Mt 13:28 the bad weeds are blamed on the enemy. In Mt 13:36-43, where the parable is being explained, there is no mention of the enemy being involved. He makes the audience have no desire to be a follower of the evil one, but rather makes the way of the Son of Man and of righteousness desirable, by describing both heaven and hell.
In this passage, a contemporary audience would find the hope of heaven to be persuasive. There are many people today that have struggling and hopeless lives. In Mt 13:43, we find that the righteous will shine. This is persuasive and appealing to people that find themselves in despair. This passage uses a parable that is fairly understandable for a contemporary audience. The hope of heaven and the description of how the righteous will shine is persuasive to a contemporary audience.
The only part of this passage that I feel would be problematic to a contemporary audience is when the author talks about how the angels are the harvesters (Mt 13:39). Most people today have only heard about angels and have not really had an encounter with one. At the time Matthew was written, angels were heard of and it was not long before this that there were encounters with them. Today angels are not usually accepted when someone feels that there was an encounter with an angel. This would be one thing that a contemporary audience would find hard to accept and understand fully. Another thing that a contemporary audience might question is the word righteous. This word is one that can be taken many different ways. Many people today would ask what makes a person righteous. They would ask who is righteous and how is a person considered righteous. A contemporary audience would find this part of the passage lacking some information. Other than that, this passage is pretty straight forward and appropriate for a contemporary audience.
In conclusion, one aspect of the parable that could possibly be "Catholic" would be the part about the enemy in Mt 13:24-30. Today there is not as many people harvesting for a living. One might have to infer about how the historical situation may have been at this time. One would need to understand the way that things were run and how the harvesting took place. In this parable, Matthew reports Jesus as saying, "Let both grow side by side until the harvest" (Mt 13:30). Jack Dean Kingsbury says, "In the parable of the tares, it is possibly in regard to the church’s relationship to Israel" (Kingsbury, 101). He also says that this could mean that the Matthean church was living close to the vigorous Jewish community (Kingsbury, 101). The is an example of a part of the passage that is particularly catholic. One would have to have a sense of the historical background to fully understand the saying that is reported. Another example of a catholic take on this parable is the when Matthew reports about the harvest in verse 30. According to Harrington, "The harvest was a common Old Testament and Jewish symbol for the final judgment" (Harrington, 58). One would have to fully understand how harvesting took place in order to understand the part of the parable about the enemy invading one’s field. In Mt 13:30, Matthew says, "First collect the weeds and bundle them up to burn, then gather the wheat into my barn" (Mt13:30). This is a parable that is extremely historical. If this story was told today, it probably would not say to tie them up in bundles and throw them in the barn. This is used because this was the way of life for the people during this time. It is easier for them to understand and gives a good illustration of the meaning of this parable.