Jesus was not an egalitarian. A critique of an anachronistic and idealist theory

Biblical Theology Bulletin, Summer, 2002 by John H. Elliott

(6) Jesus' parable of the Vineyard Laborers (Matt 20:1-15), despite its appearance only in Matthew, is accepted by Crossan as an authentic teaching of Jesus. In commenting on this parable he claims (1994b:168) that "in an interactive audience situation this story would have served to start a fierce discussion on, say, peasants and aristocrats, works and owners, equality, generosity, and egalitarianism." Although this parable surely accentuates the exemplary generosity of the owner and the despicable evil-eyed envy of the complaining laborers(cf. Elliott 1992), Crossan says nothing further about how this story would have prompted discussion about "equality" and "egalitarianism." While equality of payment (one denarius to all laborers) clearly prompted resentment (the complaint, "you have made them equal [isous] to us," actually concerns unfair treatment), the point of the story can hardly be considered an affirmation of social or economic equality within the Jesus movment or a demonstration of Jesus' egalitarianism.

(7) Jesus' teaching on "the new/true family of God" (Mark 3:31-35/Matt 12:46-50/Luke 8:19-21; GosThom 99; Gos Ebionites 5; 2 Clem. 9:11) is acknowledged as authentic by most, if not all, proponents of the egalitarian theory. But their strained interpretations thereof make only too clear the difficulties this teaching poses for their notion of Jesus' egalitarianism. Crossan (1991: 440) lists it as a unit of the "Double Independent Tradition" of the First Stratum, 30-60 CE. Within the list of Jesus' sayings considered authentic by Crossan (1991: xiii-xxvi), he also includes on p. xviii an abbreviated form of Mark 3:31-35 ("The disciples said to him, `Your brothers and your mother are standing outside.' He said to them, `Those here who do the will of God are my brothers and my mother.' "). In his THE ESSENTIAL JESUS (161-62) Crossan says nothing of Jesus' creation of a new family. He notes only that "Mediterranean kinship and familial structures accepted and perpetuated patriarchal and hierarchical domination and are repeatedly criticized by Jesus as being opposed to the radically egalitarian Kingdom of God." Theissen and Merz (1999: 218-19) also reckon the saying as authentic because of its wide attestation. But they note that Q contains "only traces of it" (God as 'Father' and humans as "brothers") and stresses "the tension with the natural family." The Gospel of Thomas, which "contains many of the `family of God' traditions (cf. 99; 79)" also includes "criticism of the natural family (cf. 101; 55; 16)."

This saying as it stands, however, expresses no critique of the family as such or of its patriarchal structure. To the contrary, it rather shows Jesus' positive conception of the family as an institution appropriate for defining life under the reign of God. What the saying expressly affirms is not a restructuring of the family along egalitarian lines, but rather a redefinition of the identity of the family of Jesus and the basis for membership--not blood or marriage but obedience to will of God. In Jesus' collectivist society this new surrogate family makes available to those who have renounced their natural families a form of community essential to their personal and social existence (Malina 1994). Because this saying explicitly and clearly indicates Jesus' positive view of the family, albeit redefined as based on faith and obedience rather than blood and marriage, Jesus' call for severance of ties with biological family and family of marriage cannot be regarded as a critique of the family as such. Nor can it be validly argued that his other sayings discussed above (on marriage, status reversal etc.) imply a rejection of the family as such. What this saying indicates is that Jesus' call to leave the family of birth and marriage was accompanied by provision of another, surrogate, family, a family that constituted the family of God in which doing the divine Father's will was the condition of membership. On this text we will have more to say below. Schussler Fiorenza, on the other hand, seeks to interpret this saying on the true family in the light of Matt 23:8-12, a passage that figures prominantly in her agument for Jesus' egalitarianism.