y appears; the refusal of those bidden in the second
parable was markedly offensive, and was coupled with outrageous abuse
and murder. The host in one instance was a wealthy though private
citizen, in the other the giver of the feast was a king. In the first,
the occasion was one of ordinary though abundant entertainment; in the
second, the determining time was that of the appointed marriage of the
royal heir. Retribution in the first instance was limited to exclusion
from the banquet; in the latter the individual punishment was death,
which was followed by the punitive example of the city's destruction.
Our account of the royal marriage feast is not yet complete; the story
already considered is supplemented by the following:
"And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man
which had not on a wedding garment: And he saith unto him,
Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment?
And he was speechless. Then said the king to the servants, Bind
him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer
darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many
are called, but few are chosen."
The lessons embodied in this section of the parable may be
advantageously considered apart from those of the first division. As was
befitting his dignity, the king came into the banquet hall after the
guests had taken their places in orderly array. His immediate detection
of one who was without the prescribed garment implies a personal
scrutiny of the guests. One may be led to inquire, how, under the
circumstances of hurried summoning, the several guests could have
suitably attired themselves for the feast. The unity of the narrative
requires that some provision had been made whereby each one who properly
applied was given the garment prescribed by the king's command, and in
keeping with the established custom at court. That the unrobed guest was
guilty of neglect, intentional disrespect, or some more grievous
offense, is plain from the context. The king at first was graciously
considerate, inquiring only as to how the man had entered without a
wedding garment. Had the guest been able to explain his exceptional
appearance, or had he any reasonable excuse to offer, he surely would
have spoken; but we are told that he remained speechless. The king's
summons had been freely extended to all whom his servants had found; but
each of them had to enter the royal palace
|