Commentary on Matthew 25:31-46

On this final Sunday of the liturgical year, Matthew gives us the final allegorical parable of Jesus’s final discourse:¹ the familiar scene in which the Son of the Human judges the nations.² The lection is especially fitting for Reign of Christ because the parable portrays the Son of the Human as “sitting on the throne of glory” (verse 31) and calls him “king” (verses 34, 40).

Like the two preceding allegories (25:1–13; 25:14–30), this parable presents “two ways”: The righteous sheep enter God’s reign (verses 34, 46), while the unrighteous goats face eternal punishment (verses 41, 46). Yet the basis of judgment is different in this parable. In the earlier parables, characters symbolizing groups inside the church (bridesmaids and slaves) are judged by their service to figures who symbolize the Son of the Human (groom and master). Here judgment turns on acts of mercy performed for or withheld from others—the hungry, thirsty, stranger, naked, sick, and imprisoned—with whom the Son of the Human identifies.

Traditionally, preachers have led hearers to ask, “Am I a sheep or a goat?” That reading follows the pattern of the preceding parables and offers a legitimate exhortation about Christian life in the already/not yet. But this interpretation of the text does not best fit Matthew’s use of this final parable. Jesus shifts from exhorting the church about faithful and responsible eschatological living to describing the judgment of those outside the church.

The key to seeing lies in two pieces of vocabulary. First, those the king is dividing into sheep and goats are called ethnoi. In scripture, the term can mean “gentiles” or “nations” (usually nations other than Israel, but sometimes all nations). By extension, the term can also be used for those outside the church.

Second is the phrase “the least of these who are my brothers and sisters” (toutōn tōn adelphōn mou elachistōn) in verse 40 and its shortened form, “the least of these” (toutōn tōn elachistōn), in verse 45. These descriptions echo Matthew’s language for members of the church community. He repeatedly uses “brothers and sisters” (adelphoi; 5:22–24, 47; 7:3–5; 12:46–50; 18:15, 21, 35; 23:8; 28:10) and “little ones” (mikroi; 10:42–44; 18:6, 10, 14), including “little ones who believe in me” in 18:6. The Son of the Human’s identification with these people as siblings especially echoes 12:50 and 28:10.

The parabolic description of how gentiles treat the least of Jesus’s siblings, then, shows that Matthew has shifted the focus from that of the first two parables to this one. Rather than asking those within the church to determine whether they belong among the fruitful or unfruitful, Jesus shows that those outside the church will also be divided. Specifically, they are judged by how they treat vulnerable members of the church. Outsiders who feed, welcome, clothe, and visit them are counted righteous; those who withhold such mercy are not.

The point is not simply a generic commendation of humanitarian virtue: The acts of mercy are directed toward those Jesus identifies as his own siblings in a society where the church is persecuted and oppressed. In a word, Matthew is willing to portray Jesus as recognizing righteousness beyond the church (see also 5:20). Reading the judged as people other than “us”—the ecclesial audience of the parable—therefore gives the text a radically different orientation from the one it usually receives in preaching.

The North American church today, at least in many settings, enjoys a significant degree of power, privilege, and protection that the early church did not. Many congregations cannot readily identify themselves as “the least of these.” Asking hearers whether they act like sheep or goats is therefore not a misuse of the text. But in a pluralistic, globalized society, the parable can also challenge how the church views outsiders. Matthew clearly imagines people outside the church who practice mercy as entering God’s reign (verse 34).

Because Matthew portrays the ethical life as the gift of salvation rather than a test for earning it, these outsiders enact the same eschatological ethic Jesus gives his disciples. What might change if the church applied the Son of the Human’s standard to people whose beliefs and ideologies differ from ours but whose acts of compassion embody values we regard as essential to Christian life? This is certainly a fitting question on a liturgical day that celebrates Christ as “king” of all.

Notes

1. For a summary of Matthew’s approach to who is “left behind,” see my commentary from two weeks ago on Matthew 25:1–13.
2. This essay is adapted from the interpretation I present in Matthew, Fortress Biblical Preaching Commentaries (Fortress, 2013).