Bible reading: Matthew 25:14-30.

“Double Your Money” was probably the most successful TV game show of the late 1950s and early 60s. It was famous for its presenter Hughie Green, who constantly interrupted contestants in order to put them off, for its perky young Cockney hostess Monica Rose, and for the soundproof box in which participants could follow the “money trail” to win £1000 – over a year’s wages for most people. Hughie Green wasn’t, I think, a very nice man (although he had a large model railway in his flat above Baker Street station); he was renowned for his many affairs and was a heavy smoker, drinker and drug user. Nevertheless his huckstering style added sparkle to British television at a time when it was all in black-and-white. And here’s some trivia you might not have known: one of the hostesses before Monica Rose was Margaret Smith, who went on to become the famous actress Dame Maggie Smith; and one of the £1000 prize-winners was Bobby Carlton, who answered questions on pop music – would you believe that he flouted the rules by refusing to go into the soundproof box!

The story we’re thinking about today – often called “the parable of the talents” – tells us of two men, one with five large bags of gold and one with two, who both succeeded in doubling their money – and then got praised for it by their boss when he returned from his travels. It also tells us of a third man who was afraid of losing the money which had been entrusted to him and so decided to bury it in the ground. The cash was certainly kept safe, but it didn’t make any interest either. Despite the man’s protestations that at least the money was still all there, the boss wasn’t pleased and instantly gave him the sack. As an investment manager the man wasn’t even paying his way.

While it may not be as well-known as the stories of the Prodigal Son or the Good Samaritan, this parable is fairly familiar. I have to say, though, that it’s not easy for people like us, twenty centuries on, to know exactly what Jesus was trying to say; we may also struggle with some elements of the story which are quite disturbing: being thrown into “darkness” where is “weeping and gnashing of teeth” doesn’t sound like a pleasant fate! And we also face one problem which is due entirely to the ambiguity of the English language (but probably not in the Aramaic which Jesus would have used to tell it) – I’m thinking of course of those two different meaning of our word “talents” which means that we’ve often got the tale’s interpretation very wrong!

Let me make things clear: despite the many sermons you may heard exhorting you to use and develop your gifts and abilities for God (a very worthy message, I would add), and despite the backing of that interpretation by such eminent Christians as St John Chrysostom and John Calvin, I honestly don’t think that this parable is about that kind of talent at all. In fact it’s about hard cash – or is it? That’s what we’ll try to work out this morning. So let me say that a talent was originally a measure of weight that became a unit of gold, silver or copper coinage. The value of a talent did vary over the years and in various places, but it was always comparatively high. As far as the New Testament is concerned there is only one other reference to the talent as a unit of currency: that’s in the parable of the Unforgiving Servant where the debt of 10,000 talents which is owed to the king is unimaginably huge. In today’s story the servants are only given five, two and one talents; nevertheless, as shown by modern Bible versions which replace the word “talents” by the phrase “bags of gold”, these were still very large sums of money as one talent alone could have been worth half a lifetime’s earnings for an average working person.

So the master gives the cash to his servants and departs. They don’t know when he’ll be back – will it be in days, weeks or months? – and they have no way of contacting him. When he arrives, it will be a total surprise – this is a fundamental feature of this story which I’ll return to later. The servants have been given no instructions about how to use the master’s money to best advantage; they must use their best judgement. So two of them take the risky decision to invest their capital (we’re not told how), while the third plays it safe. As we know, he preserves his money-pot but makes no profit; he doesn’t even take the relatively safe step of putting it on deposit at a bank (although first-century banks were not the strong and reliable institutions we know today). All this business action and inaction, by the way, must be set against the Jewish laws against usury or excessive interest: did the first two servants break this law or act in an unscrupulous way? We’re not told; but that’s what Jesus’ hearers may have thought.

I’ve already said that I don’t think this story is about us developing our natural gifts or abilities. Another interpretation is far more down-to-earth: it treats this story as Jesus’ endorsement of our capitalist economic system. That might sound far-fetched, but it is worth a brief examination. One writer who takes this view notes that the master praises the servants who have done well and suggests that “investing, not hoarding, is a godly thing to do if it accomplishes godly purposes in a godly manner”. He says that the story “commends putting capital at risk in pursuit of earning a return” and that it overturns the thinking of Christians who say that growth, productivity, and return on investment are unholy. This author rightly has no time for dodgy business practices (I’d be interested to know what he thinks of Donald Trump!) but he does believe that God approves of entrepreneurs who start new businesses that give jobs to others.

However another writer, noting that the economic life of first-century Palestine was vastly different to what we have today, critiques this approach and thinks that it panders to our greedy desires: “American Christians (for this interpretation comes from America) have minds that are shaped by capitalism. We crave what we wrongly imagine this parable is talking about. Capitalists obsessing over making profits on their investments distort Jesus by transforming him into a capitalist, too”. I agree!

So if these interpretations of the parable are incorrect (and there’s yet another which claims that the third servant is the hero as he knows that any profit he makes would be at the cost of exploiting the poor), then what is it actually about? This is where return to the idea of the master arriving back home without warning, and where we notice that Jesus begins the story by saying, “It is like …”. That little phrase does two things: it makes us ask, “What is it like?”, and it links the story to what has gone before – but what might that be? Well, immediately before this parable we have the one about the bridesmaids who need to have their lamps filled and trimmed, ready for the ready for the arrival of the bridegroom who will turn up unannounced. Like Scouts, they had to “be prepared” – but some weren’t.

Going back to the previous chapter, we have another parable about a servant – a kind of butler in charge of the household. This man takes advantage of his master’s absence by beating up his underlings and getting drunk on the contents of his boss’s wine-cellar. He thinks that he can get away with his behaviour, but gets caught out and punished when the master unexpectedly returns. Jesus contrasts this wicked fellow with the good steward who is clearly looking after his comrades when the master comes back. Can you see a theme developing here? If not, what about Jesus’ tale of a householder who, if he’d known that he was about to be burgled, would have kept watch for the thief.

You see, all these stories are really about people doing the right things in order to be ready for “the coming of the Son of Man”, Christ’s return to earth. They begin with the disciples asking a question and come to a climax in the vivid but chilling scene of judgement which comes straight after today’s parable: Christ sitting on his throne and dividing the sheep from the similar-looking goats. Contrary to what we might expect, his division isn’t made on grounds of religion or faith, but on deeds. People who offered meals to strangers, clothed those who only had rags, or visited prisoners, are welcomed into Christ’s kingdom because, without even knowing it, they have served him. The others, who ignored the poor and needy, are rejected – for ever.

Let’s try and draw our threads together. But, before I do, let me say that this tricky parable is not an allegory in which every little element has a meaning. This means that we shouldn’t be too precise in saying, “The master represents God, the servants represent us, and the gold represents … whatever”. Parables don’t work like that; they obviously want to make a point but that usually lies in the punchline at the end rather than in the details. So here, instead of trying to work out the possible meaning of every aspect of the story, we need to go to the bit we shy away from: Jesus’ words “The person who has something will have more given to them. But the person who has nothing will have even that taken away. And throw this useless servant into the darkness outside, where he can weep and wail over his stupidity”. Ouch!

So how can I sum up? Well, Jesus taught his disciples about the kingdom of heaven. That teaching brought about a sacred trust, a responsibility for those disciples to both live out and proclaim the kingdom’s values so that other people can embrace it and it grows. In other words the disciples received the valuable treasure about God and were expected to invest it in others so that God’s kingdom could expand. This does seem a bit vague and abstract, so I’ll put it in more practical terms. First, we have been given the Christian message of salvation and hope; we are charged to pass that message on, not bury it or keep it to ourselves. Also we know how we should be growing God’s kingdom on earth, in actions such as serving the poor, fighting for justice or striving for peace. It’s wrong to have that knowledge but do nothing with it. It is to be used – and we’ll be held accountable for our words and actions (or lack of them) when Jesus returns.

The Anglican theologian Ian Paul says that God has been “recklessly generous” in giving himself to us in Jesus. If we’ve really received and understood that, then we ourselves will be reckless and generous with sharing this good news. Hiding it away, doing nothing with it, shows that we have never really understood it. We believe that Jesus will return; but being ready for that momentous event doesn’t involve endless speculation about “how” or “why” or “when” that will happen. No; being ready, being prepared, means that Jesus will find us active, already serving his world and sharing the good news of his kingdom.