"Will you act on what you have and know?"

Once there was a wealthy man who went away for a long time. Before he left, he entrusted part of his wealth with three different servants. Without instruction but according to their ability, he gave to one servant 100 years worth of wages, to the second servant he gave 40 years and to the third servant he gave 20 years of wages.

Immediately the first servant went and invested his 100 years worth of wages. Likewise the second servant, who had only 40 years worth of wages, invested it all for his master. But the third servant saw things differently. He knew the master to be quite a harsh judge. he feared what the master might do if he failed so he simply hid what he had received to protect it from loss.

When the master returned and saw that the first and second servants had invested what they had been given and produced a 100% return, he was pleased. He promised them even greater job responsibility, as well as a joyful presence in his kingdom. His response to the third servant was not so positive. The master chastened the third servant calling him wicked and slothful. The master gave what the third servant had to the other servants and cast the third servant out away from any further provision of the master.

You have probably heard this story and maybe even heard experts ponder its meaning. The natural tendency for people is to hear stories of truth through ears that are tuned into reward and punishment. To claim that yes indeed the master is harsh in his punishment. The alternative way to listen to truth told in stories about the Master and His Kingdom is to hear what the Master is saying about his kingdom. A recent pondering I heard was quite penetrating and insightful.

Instead of focusing on the "punishment" given to the third servant for not behaving in a way pleasing to the master, maybe we should focus on what the master meant by "wicked and slothful." What was the real difference between the servants. After all, the third servant did not squander what the master gave him, The third servant did not spend it on vile activities. He did not lie to the master or cheat him in any way. So what was it that the Master saw that he claimed was "wicked"?

The difference between the servants could not be in the absolute amount of money returned to the master because the second servant returned less in absolute amount and was equally pleasing to the master. So what was "wicked" about the third servant? He did not lack ability since ability was understood by the master going in. He did not lack time since the master was gone a long time and the same amount time was available for all servants to invest. He did not lack knowledge of the master since he knew the master could be a "harsh judge".

The "wickedness" of the third servant was his faithlessness. He played it safe, avoided risks. His "carefulness" replaced faithfulness and was motivated by fear, He thought playing it safe with what the master had entrusted him would protect him from failure. Maybe what the Master wants from His servants is to be faithful with what they have been given. Maybe fear is at the heart of "wickedness"?

We each have a life to live. We each have been entrusted with something. Some more than others. There is always something more we wish we had before stepping out. There's always something we wish we knew before we had the confidence to step out. This story is reminding us that stepping out with what we have and what we know, in faith, is the life we have been asked to live. Nothing more ... Nothing less. Its the failure to act on what we have and what we know that makes us "wicked"!  Now that is worth pondering ....