Tenants and Brothers

The Old Testament has always seemed very direct and straightforward compared to the subtleties of the Gospels: there are those who follow God’s word and there are those who are just wicked. At first glance, Genesis 27 confirms that belief. But Matthew’s recounting of Jesus’ parable is surprisingly similar. The story of Joseph and the parable of the Landowner both present clear protagonists and easy to spot villains.

As a counselor I have had to learn to resist the temptation of putting people into these categories. A few years back I had a student who reported that he was getting bullied. According to his report classmates were making fun of his weight by tickling him when he walked down the hall. I was worried about the kid and disappointed in the other sophomores. So I approached the teacher of the class where the bullying was the worst and asked her if she noticed anything unusual with the student. “Yes,” she said, “I must ask him several times a day to stop tickling other kids!’ Based on her observations, he was clearly the instigator. In the student’s mind however, he was justified in doing it because “it was just a joke”. When the same behavior was directed his way, his insecurities clouded his interpretation. In the movie of his life, he could never cast himself as the villain.

And so I imagine that when Joseph’s siblings talk about the “master dreamer”, they clearly see their brother as a threat. The tenants in Jesus’s parable are also rationalizing their selfish intentions. Focused solely on their own needs, blended with prior experiences, clouded with insecurities, based on myths and misunderstandings, distrust and original sin they weren’t being villains; they were behaving like normal flawed jealous humans.

The Old Testament may seem simple to me because it is easier to judge others and move on. But when I make these quick judgments I often discount the pain of the labeled antagonist. It is certainly a quicker process, with little examination, and even less introspection. The truth is I have difficulty seeing my own transgressions against others.

I try not to be a political person, not because I don’t have engrained beliefs and an overactive moral compass, but because I find that when I read political commentary I often lose sight of the other. I am fascinated by the psychology of the other and of “otherizing”. I like to imagine that I am more like Joseph and less like his brothers, more like the landowner and less like the tenants because villains are easy to spot from a righteous pedestal. It is far more challenging to read these Old Testament stories through the eyes of the sinner.

For the last year I have had this work of art stuck in my head. It is a piece that is meant to create communal dissonance. My hope was that people would talk it about in the same space and share how it made them feel. In this collage I wanted to walk the line of two perspectives, neither wrong nor right but potentially divisive. The story goes like this: a black man’s car breaks down. A white office pulls over to investigate or to simply help. As the two approach each other, what mental narratives shape their emotions of the moment? How do those emotions then shape their actions? How do we, as viewers with our own set of life experiences, political leanings, and current circumstances interpret the interaction. Is there a hero? Is there a villain? And where do we fit in this scene in light of Jesus’s words:

The stone that the builders rejected
has become the cornerstone;
by the Lord has this been done, 

and it is wonderful in our eyes?

Author: David Williams, Sophomore Counselor