Christian Economics: Teacher’s Edition
‘For the kingdom of heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. And going out about the third hour he saw others standing idle in the marketplace, and to them he said, ‘You go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went. Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, ‘Why do you stand here idle all day?’ They said to him, ‘Because no one has hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You go into the vineyard too.’ And when evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, ‘Call the laborers and pay them their wages, beginning with the last, up to the first.’ And when those hired about the eleventh hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now when those hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. And on receiving it they grumbled at the master of the house, saying, ‘These last worked only one hour, and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat.’ But he replied to one of them, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what belongs to you and go. I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity?” (Matthew 20:1 – 15).
Analysis’Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me?’ This verse is the most powerful affirmation of property rights in the New Testament. The context of the statement is Jesus’ parable of the employer who hires men at various times throughout the day. At the end of the day, he pays all of them the same. He broke no contract. They had all agreed to work for him for a full day. They had agreed at various times during the day. But those who had worked all day complained. Clearly, those laborers who were hired late in the day received a much higher payment per hour of work.
In response, the employer affirmed the right of contract and also the right of ownership. But this affirmation applied to them, too. They had possessed the both the ability and opportunity to work for a wage. No one compelled them to accept his offer. As owners of their labor, they had the right to decline the offer. They did not decline. But after a day’s work, they compared their hourly wages with late-comers’ hourly wages. They grew discontented. They wanted more.
This post was published at Gary North on July 19, 2017.