Jesus gives old words new meanings. He tells His opponents the ancient parable from the prophet Isaiah (ch. 5) about how his (Isaiah's) friend planted a good vineyard, but thorns and wild grapes grew in it - yet the main meaning of this parable is radically changed by Him.

There the Lord did not receive fruit from His vineyard because His people did not fulfill the elementary moral demands of the law: they oppressed, killed, and deceived one another; this is precisely how their unbelief and "not knowing God" were revealed. Jesus' parable, on the contrary, is addressed to righteous, devout people who are certain that they are the very ones who know God and bring Him the best fruits. Here the "fruitlessness" of the vineyard is caused by the fact that its "vinedressers" do not know how to believe: they reject the prophets and Christ Himself. It is Jesus Himself who here takes the place of Isaiah's moral demands: He is the One in whom the people of God's Kingdom must bear fruit, and the One for whom all the vineyards of the earth were planted.

Today's reading again offers us the parable of the vineyard told by Jesus. This parable, like all parables of this kind, is messianic, and the vineyard here, as in the Bible in general, becomes a symbol of the messianic Kingdom.

To understand the parable it is important to keep in mind that the Pharisaic movement was a messianic movement. Its participants considered themselves to be the very remnant of which the prophets spoke. Of course, the prophets spoke of the remnant with a small part of the people in mind, one that, after passing through trials, and the Babylonian exile became such a trial for the Jewish people, would preserve the faith and meet the Messiah promised by God. But already after the exile and after the people's return to the land of their fathers, a brotherhood movement formed in the Synagogue, and its members began to consider themselves precisely the remnant. They were called "Pharisees," that is, "the separated ones," "sectarians." Perhaps at first this was a somewhat contemptuous nickname, but in Gospel times members of the brotherhood already called themselves "Pharisees" willingly, and even with a certain defiance. They considered themselves the spiritual heirs of the prophets and the guardians of the traditions of prophetic messianism.

Jesus places them in the same line with those who in ancient times persecuted and killed the prophets (vv. 34-36). From His point of view, they had in fact turned out to be heirs not of the prophets, but of their persecutors. And they completed what their predecessors had begun (vv. 37-39).

And here what actually makes the cross of Christ inevitable took place. The listeners understood Jesus perfectly. And they decided to kill Him (vv. 45-46). Quite recently the matter could have been a theological discussion (vv. 23-27); now the discussion threatened to turn into bloodshed. And no wonder: the unwillingness to answer Jesus' question (vv. 25-27) was not accidental. There was a choice here: to acknowledge the obvious and abandon their own views and concepts, or to abandon nothing, closing their eyes to God's will. Jesus' interlocutors in fact choose the second. And if in this situation Jesus, even after denouncing His listeners, had not insisted on anything, perhaps everything would have passed without conflict, and there would have appeared the possibility of coexistence among different points of view, of which there were already many in the Synagogue of Gospel times.

But Jesus says directly that the issue is not opinions, but the Kingdom, and here there can be no compromise (vv. 43-44). And His listeners understand that the matter is no longer a theological dispute, but survival: if this strange Teacher is right, they will have to leave, giving place to others. And He will not yield just like that. He puts the question bluntly and will stand His ground to the end. Then those who do not want to leave and do not want to accept have only one possibility left. For if this Man really dies, then the problem will resolve itself: it will become clear that He is no Messiah and no prophet; therefore those who did not accept Him were right and can sleep peacefully. In this way, rejection of Christ makes His cross inevitable.

We are used to applying what is said in the parable of the vineyard to the religious leaders of the people of Israel whom it rebukes. But everything spoken of in the Gospel applies not only to events in places and times far removed from us, but also to the actions of all of us who, in any age, stand before the Lord.

Those who entered the vineyard were originally called there for service, but over time they wanted to possess the fruits themselves. Let us note that the Owner of the vineyard has no intention of leaving the workers without a reward; He gladly shares His fruits with them. But people want everything, even if it is impossible to take everything in. Well then, if we cannot eat it, we will at least bite into it. But where only the fruits are needed, the Owner of the vineyard becomes unnecessary, and the desire arises to become the owner oneself.

Such usurpation may last a long time, but the One who is not mocked will sooner or later destroy the delusion. Only not everyone will understand this, and therefore they will try again and again to insist on their own way. This means that again and again we must take to heart what the Savior has said.