Let's Study the Parables - 3 - Parable of the Talents

[NotWorthy]

I’m doing a study on these forums of the parables. I’d like to study each parable individually looking at:

a) What is the Message behind the Parable?
b) What doctrines do we see being taught in each Parable?
c) Can a Parable be used to defend against Non-Catholic doctrines?
d) What is the context of the Parable?

If you’d like to discuss Parables in General, I’ve got a thread dedicated to that here:

If you’d like to see what other Parables are being studied, you’ll find the Table of Contents here:

With that in mind, I’d like to do a study on

The Money in Trust [or Parable of the Talents] ***
*** Preparing for the Kingdom of God

**Scripture: ***Luke 19:11-28
*

***11 As they heard these things, he proceeded to tell a parable, because he was near to Jerusalem, and because they supposed that the kingdom of God was to appear immediately. 12 He said therefore, "A nobleman went into a far country to receive a kingdom and then return. 13 Calling ten of his servants, he gave them ten pounds, and said to them, Trade with these till I come.' 14 But his citizens hated him and sent an embassy after him, saying, We do not want this man to reign over us.’

15 When he returned, having received the kingdom, he commanded these servants, to whom he had given the money, to be called to him, that he might know what they had gained by trading. 16 The first came before him, saying, Lord, your pound has made ten pounds more.' 17 And he said to him, Well done, good servant! Because you have been faithful in a very little, you shall have authority over ten cities.’ 18 And the second came, saying, Lord, your pound has made five pounds.' 19 And he said to him, And you are to be over five cities.’ 20 Then another came, saying, `Lord, here is your pound, which I kept laid away in a napkin; 21 for I was afraid of you, because you are a severe man; you take up what you did not lay down, and reap what you did not sow.’

22 He said to him, `I will condemn you out of your own mouth, you wicked servant! You knew that I was a severe man, taking up what I did not lay down and reaping what I did not sow? 23 Why then did you not put my money into the bank, and at my coming I should have collected it with interest?’

24 And he said to those who stood by, Take the pound from him, and give it to him who has the ten pounds.' 25 (And they said to him, Lord, he has ten pounds!’) 26 `I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away. 27 But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slay them before me.’" 28 And when he had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem.***

I thought this time of the year is perfect for this parable. Why is that?

Because I think that this parable may have been heard by Dismus, the Good Thief. It seems he understood Jesus to be the subject of this Parable ("A nobleman went into a far country to receive a kingdom and then return) when he says, “Jesus, remember me when you come in your kingly power” (Lk. 23:42).

There’s more to this Parable, and I’m anxious to cover it, but I thought this is something that is not readily evident in the story.

What are your thoughts on this Parable?

 

[NotWorthy]

We also know that Jesus is heading to Jerusalem to be handed over to the Jews and to be crucified. This seems to be on His mind as He talks about the judgments on those enemies of the king (verse 27).

 

[Nita]

Bump.

This is one of my favorite parables. But won’t have the time to respond till after Easter. (Just decided to do a quick check to see if there had been any activity. Guess we’re all busy right now.)

Nita

 

[BRB]

Would appear that this Catholic [with the single talent] … buried his baptism/confirmation experience and returned to live fully in the World … w/o any concerns for carrying cross of Christ.

Does he still gain eternal life for his disobedience [via extreme term of penance in Purgatory] ?

Parable seems to suggest that his failure to follow Christ will land him in Hell for eternity.

James teaches that Faith w/o works done via direction of H.S.} is dead. I’d guess he learned this from Christ’s direct teaching or from parables like this one.

 

[MarcoPolo]

I think one of the spiritual meanings in this passage, that I have only recently seen, is how the talents are the gift of grace, essentially we are given Christ in us. What we do with that grace follows. And when we return, we are recognized as having merit, for the grace we utilized was Christ himself. From an apologetic standpoint, those who say our good works have no merit, actually deny Christ…in a way…

 

[scaron]

The Talents represent the gift of Faith thru grace (freely given, thru no merit of the recievers).

Every man, given the gift of Faith, has the requirement to grow in that faith, thru prayer, and the work of the Kingdom.

Those who abandon that requirement, and do not attempt to grow in Faith and the knowledge of the Lord, will in the end lose that gift:

24 And he said to those who stood by, Take the pound from him, and give it to him who has the ten pounds.' 25 (And they said to him, Lord, he has ten pounds!’) 26 `I tell you, that to every one who has will more be given; but from him who has not, even what he has will be taken away.

Our Lord is saying, “Use it or Lose it!”

How true this is! We all know someone who has abandonded the faith quietly - just stopped learning, stopped growing, stopped going to Church (or only continues to go thru inertia).

 

[NotWorthy]

Would appear that this Catholic [with the single talent] … buried his baptism/confirmation experience and returned to live fully in the World … w/o any concerns for carrying cross of Christ.

Does he still gain eternal life for his disobedience [via extreme term of penance in Purgatory] ?

Purgatory doesn’t get you out of hell. Jesus’ message here would seem to indicate that the man with one talent is in a whole mess of trouble.

Now, of course, if the man is able to repent and change his ways due to the lesson of the Parable! Maybe he is friends with the Prodigal Son and learned from him!!!

Parable seems to suggest that his failure to follow Christ will land him in Hell for eternity.

James teaches that Faith w/o works [done via direction of H.S.} is dead. I’d guess he learned this from Christ’s direct teaching or from parables like this one.

I would think so.

Although Catholics don’t preach “salvation by works”, it is clear that our works (done via direction of the H.S. and our acceptance of the H.S. guidance) have an influence on where we get to spend eternity.

I think it’s because Jesus’ teaching on belief includes obedience. Actually, you can’t have one without the other.
[/quote]

 

[NotWorthy]

So… how many of you realize that you have been given 10 talents and understand what that means in regards to working for Christ?

 

[BRB]

Purgatory doesn’t get you out of hell. Jesus’ message here would seem to indicate that the man with one talent is in a whole mess of trouble.

Now, of course, if the man is able to repent and change his ways due to the lesson of the Parable! Maybe he is friends with the Prodigal Son and learned from him!!!

I would think so.

Although Catholics don’t preach “salvation by works”, it is clear that our works (done via direction of the H.S. and our acceptance of the H.S. guidance) have an influence on where we get to spend eternity.

I think it’s because Jesus’ teaching on belief includes obedience. Actually, you can’t have one without the other.

Judas might present us an example here… He was baptized [perhaps by John the Baptist] and confirmed by Christ. He no doubt had some good works during the 3 years. Enough so that even the other 11 disciples did not realize he was unfaithful and ‘probably’ stealing money from the money bag he was entrusted with.

Yet Christ knew his heart was not true. Judas had lost the H.S. in his life. Yet, even after he betrayed Christ, he realized his mistake. Clearly he did not recover sufficiently before his suicide … and died in mortal sin. And the teaching is clear, he went to meet satan, his real master.

 

[NotWorthy]

Judas might present us an example here… He was baptized [perhaps by John the Baptist] and confirmed by Christ. He no doubt had some good works during the 3 years. Enough so that even the other 11 disciples did not realize he was unfaithful and ‘probably’ stealing money from the money bag he was entrusted with.

Although I’m not disagreeing with your take on Judas, the Baptism of John was non-Sacramental. It was a baptism of repentance, but nothing more.

Also, If Judas did miracles in the name of Christ, this was due to a charism that Christ gave him, which has no bearing on the state of Judas’ soul. Charisms such as miracles and exorcisms are signs for others to believe, but they have no bearing on the state of being of the miracle worker.

Yet Christ knew his heart was not true. Judas had lost the H.S. in his life. Yet, even after he betrayed Christ, he realized his mistake. Clearly he did not recover sufficiently before his suicide … and died in mortal sin. And the teaching is clear, he went to meet satan, his real master.

Again, I would agree on your assessment of the state of Judas’ soul. He gave into despair, rather than trusting in Jesus’ 3 years of preaching forgiveness. It seems Judas should have paid a little more attention to Christ’s sermons, rather than wondering why Mary (or was it Martha?) would waste 300 silver pieces worth of oil on the Master.

 

[BRB]

, the Baptism of John was non-Sacramental. It was a baptism of repentance, but nothing more.

.

I personally believe John’s baptism was efficacious. Christ received it from him … and received visible manifestation of H.S. immediately thereafter. Clearly Christ had no need of repentance … yet it was still of value, as John was simply the human vessel thru which the sacrament got established.

There is no evidence the apostles [who receive baptism via John] ever got re-baptised after Church was established. Jesus never baptised anyone.

 

[scaron]

So… how many of you realize that you have been given 10 talents and understand what that means in regards to working for Christ?

This is exactly the right question, and IMO is the meaning of the parable.

 

[scaron]

I personally believe John’s baptism was efficacious. Christ received it from him … and received visible manifestation of H.S. immediately thereafter. Clearly Christ had no need of repentance … yet it was still of value, as John was simply the human vessel thru which the sacrament got established.

There is no evidence the apostles [who receive baptism via John] ever got re-baptised after Church was established. Jesus never baptised anyone.

This is not the teaching of our Holy Mother Church.

The Church says:

CCC 720

720 Finally, with John the Baptist, the Holy Spirit begins the restoration to man of “the divine likeness,” prefiguring what he would achieve with and in Christ. John’s baptism was for repentance; baptism in water and the Spirit will be a new birth.

And as footnoted in that paragraph, John 3:15

Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.”

As John (the Baptist) says (in the Gospel of John):

32* And John bore witness, "I saw the Spirit descend as a dove from heaven, and it remained on him. 33 I myself did not know him; but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’

John baptised with water, for repentance. Only Our Lord (and those who baptise in His name) can baptise “in Water and the Spirit”.

 

[BRB]

This is not the teaching of our Holy Mother Church.

The Church says:

CCC 720

And as footnoted in that paragraph, John 3:15

As John (the Baptist) says (in the Gospel of John):

John baptised with water, for repentance. Only Our Lord (and those who baptise in His name) can baptise “in Water and the Spirit”.

Even today we are Baptized for repentance [of original and all other sins committed up until the time of our Baptism]. Same as John was doing. The only difference is that John was not doing the 3 stage Trinity baptism process before he met Christ. Thereafter, he no doubt began adding name of Jesus and H.S. to the processes … although he soon became prisoner of Herod and would of had no further opportunity to baptize.

Paul speaks of some early believers baptized by John … who needed to be re-baptized into the full Trinty in order to receive H.S. This suggests that ‘perhaps’ the apostles and other disciples were re-baptized when the early church was first established … but, no clear Catholic teaching on this I know of.

Since Christ breathed the H.S. onto his Apostles soon after his Easter Passion, which was further strengthened by H.S. of Pentecost … they got a double confirmation of sorts.

Its probably a mystery of our faith we will never have firm answer to. Which is fine … not all questions need answers.

 

[Nita]

20 Then another came, saying, `Lord, here is your pound, which I kept laid away in a napkin;

This is the line I find very interesting. The man had kept very safe the gift he had been given - didn’t forget he had it; guarded against losing it; … But that was not enough.

Taking the “pound” as symbolizing the gift of faith, the parable can be used to refute the non-Catholic doctrines of faith alone and once saved always saved.

Nita

 

[scaron]

This is the line I find very interesting. The man had kept very safe the gift he had been given - didn’t forget he had it; guarded against losing it; … But that was not enough.

Taking the “pound” as symbolizing the gift of faith, the parable can be used to refute the non-Catholic doctrines of faith alone and once saved always saved.

Nita

Yes! Yes!

the Lord is saying “There is no laying it aside”! it must be cultivated, and nurtured, and fed good food. No Mattress-Stuffers need apply!

Interesting too (for geeky MBAs such as myself) that He uses an argument from finance - that a dollar not accruing interest is actually losing value.

Then the final condemnation - to those of you that work at growing rich in faith - you will receive more, and more, and more. And those who lay it down - they will lose even the little they had.

 

[NotWorthy]

I personally believe John’s baptism was efficacious. Christ received it from him … and received visible manifestation of H.S. immediately thereafter. Clearly Christ had no need of repentance … yet it was still of value, as John was simply the human vessel thru which the sacrament got established.

There is no evidence the apostles [who receive baptism via John] ever got re-baptised after Church was established. Jesus never baptised anyone.

Do you ever wonder if that was simply a sign for us? I mean, Christ is continuously united with the Holy Spirit and God, the Father. He didn’t "receive’ the Holy Spirit at the Jordan. Christ said he was baptized “to fulfill all righteousness”, not to receive the Holy Spirit.

And besides, when we are baptized “in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit”, then we receive the Holy Spirit. Not when we are baptized to repent of our sins as John did.

For instance, take a closer look at Acts. In one of the chapters, some people have not received the Holy Spirit yet. When Paul asked them how they were baptized, they reply “by John the Baptist” (paraphrasing). So Paul baptizes them sacramentally and they receive the Holy Spirit.

 

[NotWorthy]

Even today we are Baptized for repentance [of original and all other sins committed up until the time of our Baptism]. Same as John was doing. The only difference is that John was not doing the 3 stage Trinity baptism process before he met Christ. Thereafter, he no doubt began adding name of Jesus and H.S. to the processes … although he soon became prisoner of Herod and would of had no further opportunity to baptize.

There is no Scripture that shows this. But there is Scripture that shows that John’s Baptisms were not efficacious. As you discuss below.

As Scaron mentioned, John’s baptizing simply pre-figured Trinitarian Baptisms.

You mentioned in a previous post:
"BRB:

I personally believe John’s baptism was efficacious. Christ received it from him … and received visible manifestation of H.S. immediately thereafter. Clearly Christ had no need of repentance … yet it was still of value, as John was simply the human vessel thru which the sacrament got established.

There is no evidence the apostles [who receive baptism via John] ever got re-baptised after Church was established. Jesus never baptised anyone.

Christ didn’t receive the Holy Spirit. Christ is joined with the Holy Spirit and God the Father continuously, so in receiving the visible manifestation, Christ was showing us what happens when we are baptized in His Name.

I see that you are using the “there is no evidence the apostles got rebaptized” while ignoring the “there is no evidence that John changed his Baptism to a Trinitarian formula”. Besides, there is no evidence the Apostles got baptized by John (or Jesus for that matter).

Paul speaks of some early believers baptized by John … who needed to be re-baptized into the full Trinty in order to receive H.S. This suggests that ‘perhaps’ the apostles and other disciples were re-baptized when the early church was first established … but, no clear Catholic teaching on this I know of.

No, it simply proves that John the Baptists’ baptisms (say that 3 times fast!) were not efficacious.

Since Christ breathed the H.S. onto his Apostles soon after his Easter Passion, which was further strengthened by H.S. of Pentecost … they got a double confirmation of sorts.

Its probably a mystery of our faith we will never have firm answer to. Which is fine … not all questions need answers.

True, but Jesus specifically said that the Holy Spirit would not come until He left(or, IOW, he died). The Holy Spirit did not seal anybody who was baptized by John since Jesus was still alive during John’s baptisms.

Therefore, John the Baptists baptisms (John the Baptists’ baptisms, John the Baptists’ baptisms… there… I said it ) were not efficacious.

 

[NotWorthy]

Yes! Yes!

the Lord is saying “There is no laying it aside”! it must be cultivated, and nurtured, and fed good food. No Mattress-Stuffers need apply!

Interesting too (for geeky MBAs such as myself) that He uses an argument from finance - that a dollar not accruing interest is actually losing value.

Then the final condemnation - to those of you that work at growing rich in faith - you will receive more, and more, and more. And those who lay it down - they will lose even the little they had.

To You and Nita:

[sign]Amen!!![/sign]

 

[BRB]

No, it simply proves that John the Baptists’ baptisms (say that 3 times fast!) were not efficacious.

True, but Jesus specifically said that the Holy Spirit would not come until He left(or, IOW, he died). The Holy Spirit did not seal anybody who was baptized by John since Jesus was still alive during John’s baptisms.

Therefore, John the Baptists baptisms (John the Baptists’ baptisms, John the Baptists’ baptisms… there… I said it ) were not efficacious.

Well, I think there is alot we can’t be sure about on this matter.
But, John’s baptism was most efficacious … for what it was intended. That being to purify from sins those who came to him in true repentance. And in the case of Jesus … it was efficacious in that it 1.) marked seal of approval on the sacrament … and 2.) allowed H.S. to decend upon Jesus in visible form [that John saw] which ‘remained’ upon Jesus. Thus, Jesus did receive a ‘demonstrable presence’ of H.S. on this occasion … to add to the invisible H.S. He already had within.

Certainly those Jews baptised by John received spiritual healing from it. The H.S. ? No. But, they were certainly cleansed of previous sins.

Furthermore, once John met Christ … he continued to baptize … but, now it was for Repentance (Plus) … not just in the expectation of the Christ, but now in name of living God-man Christ.

Jesus was also preaching same message as John … that of Repentance and belief in Gospel message [from the One]. And, his disciples were doing the baptizing for him [at His direction].

For a period both messengers were jointly promoting the good news … but, Jesus and his group were getting more converts. Thus, it can be inferred that Jesus never told John to stop doing his efficacious ministry. Commonsense should tell us that John recognized and modified his baptisms to conform with message of Jesus.

John was the greatest prophet born of woman … and had the H.S. while within womb. If any man ever lived w/o sin … it would of been John the Baptizer. The Bible does not say that he was sinless … but, probably very close to the perfect man, and thus everything he did was truly efficacious.