Alike from the facts of the case, from the analogy of others, and from
the corresponding spiritual lesson as elsewhere declared in Scripture,
we conclude with confidence that the wedding garment was a well
understood distinctive badge, expressive generally of loyalty, and
specifically constituting and declaring the wearer's fitness for sitting
as a guest at the marriage supper of the king's son. In appearance it
must have been conspicuous; but its value may not have been great. It
was not the inherent worth of the material but the meaning of the symbol
that bulked in the estimation of both the entertainer and his guests. It
may from analogous cases be shown to be probable that a loyal heart
could have easily extemporized the appropriate symbol out of any
material that lay next at hand. Where there is a will there is a way.
Italian patriots at the crisis of their conflict with multiform
oppression, and while the strong yoke of the despot was still upon their
necks, contrived to display their darling tricolor by a seemingly
accidental arrangement of red, white, and green among the vegetables
which they exhibited in the market or carried to their homes. Nay more,
the loyalty of a loyal man may in certain circumstances be more
emphatically expressed by a rude, extemporaneous symbol, hastily
constructed of intractable materials, than by the most elaborate
and leisurely products of the needle or the loom. In such cases, the
will of the man is everything; the wealth of the man nothing. The
meanest rag suddenly thrown across the shoulders, arranged so as
unequivocally to express the wearer's faith may be a better evidence of
loyalty than the richest silks of the East.[48]
[48] A custom connected with funerals, which prevails in some
districts of England, if not in all, approaches closely in some of
its essential features to that which occupies the most conspicuous
place in this parable. A scarf of black silk, large, conspicuous,
and expensive, yet constituting no part of the proper garments of
the wearer, is given by the person who invites, and worn by every
one who accepts the invitation. A single person without the badge in
the procession would be instantly detected, and the omission would,
in the circumstances, be taken as proof of disrespect.
* * * * *
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account