African Sun Media

SUN PReSS

Chapter Title: God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it? Re-reading Matthew 20:1-16
in the face of workplace economic injustices
Chapter Author(s): Lilly Phiri

Book Title: Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

Book Editor(s): Vuyani Vellem, Patricia Sheerattan-Bisnauth, Philip Vinod Peacock
Published by: African Sun Media, SUN PReSS. (2017)
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1nzg057.20

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

This book is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-

NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). To view a copy of this license,
visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.

African Sun Media, SUN PReSS are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it?
Re-reading Matthew 20:1-16 in the face of workplace
economic injustices
Rev. Lilly Phiri

Bible text from Matthew 20; John 10

Introduction
‘Animal Farm’, a common and exciting satire written by George Orwell, begins with a very
drunk Mr. Jones (owner of Manor Farm) who is doing a really bad job of managing the
farm. Luckily, there is a wise pig on the farm, Old Major who encourages the neglected
animals to rebel and run the farm themselves with one important qualification: everyone
should be equal.

After the death of Old Major, the idea of rebelling against Mr. Jones seems like a grand
idea for almost all the animals on the farm. And so, they successfully rebel and chase away
Mr. Jones. The pigs, being the smartest animals, naturally take the leadership role. One of
the animals on the farm is Boxer, a loyal horse. Boxer has one goal, to work hard for the
success of the farm no matter what.

So much for that equality business, so much for Old Major’s vision of a peaceful coup,
too, because there is an immediate conflict between two pigs, Napoleon and Snowball.
Napoleon wants to sit around and be in charge of everything, while Snowball wants to
teach the other animals and build a windmill. Obviously, Snowball’s plan is way better, so
he wins. Seeing this, Napoleon uses his private army of nine ferocious and enormous dogs
to become the self-appointed leader.

With Snowball out of the picture, the other pigs blame everything on him. They exploit the
other animals shamelessly, breaking all the rules about equality that they had established
after the rebellion. Life on the farm gets worse and worse, the animals forget Old Major’s
original dream, that everyone must be equal and the pigs make some poor management
decisions when dealing with the neighbouring farms. The culminating miserable moment
comes when the pigs send Boxer, a hardworking and loyal horse who is ready for retirement,
to his death by selling him off.

163

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

In short, the pigs are starting to look a lot like the horrible human owners that we started
with at the beginning of this whole mess, walking on two legs and everything. In fact, they
may even be worse as they adopt the slogan ‘all animals are equal but some animals are
more equal than others’.

Explanation of the parable text

Matthew’s parable about the workers in the vineyard is about a landowner who decides
to go out and hire workers for his vineyard early one morning. He agreed to pay them
a denarius for a day’s work and sent the first group of workers into the vineyard.
Interestingly, he agrees on the pay with the first workers he hires – a denarius for a day’s
work. Nevertheless, we do not hear the workers’ voices in this agreement; neither do we
hear any form of negotiation between the landowner and the workers.

A denarius was a typical day’s pay of that time and enough to buy a pound of wheat,
which would last a person one day. Paying these workers a denarius was in fact creating
a dependence cycle as these workers would certainly need to work each day for their
survival. They would have to labour each day just to put food on the table.

At 9 a.m. the landowner once more went out and saw other people standing in the
marketplace doing nothing.

The questions we may ask here are: Why were these workers standing in the marketplace
instead of being at work? What factors pushed them to be in the marketplace?

ƒƒ First, these workers could have once been landowners who had lost their land due
to debts incurred, hence, were forced by circumstances to become labourers and not
landowners.
ƒƒ Second, these ‘former landowners turned labourers’ only had skills and knowledge
in farming and so, had no choice but to wait to be employed on vineyards where their
skills and knowledge could be useful.
ƒƒ Last, there was an influx in the labour force, thus, jobs were scarce.
This time, there was no agreement between the workers hired in the morning and the
landowner. They were only told to go and work in his vineyard and he would pay them
whatever is right.

164

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it?

The notion of ‘what is right’ is not clear; whether the landowner meant what was right by
his own standards, what was right by the workers or what was right in terms of payments
prevailing at that time. This shows a contestation between decent and living wages.

The landowner once more went out at noon, at three and five in the afternoon and evening
to hire more workers. The different hours of hiring may also show that being employed or
not was the prerogative of the landowner since he controlled the finances.

One wonders why the landowner could have opted to hire the workers in bits and pieces
and did not hire the entire workforce he needed at once. The workers taken on at noon and
later in the afternoon must have waited all day at the marketplace, wishing and praying to
be taken on by any landowner that might come to the marketplace.

It was a context where the workforce was such that the economy could not take all workers
in. It was a context where the one with the money was the one to determine who was
economically in and who was not and how much a worker was to earn.

By the end of the day, the owner of the vineyard called his foreman to pay the workers
their wages, beginning with the workers who came at five in the evening and ending with
the ones who were brought in first.

Imagine the questions that were going through the minds of those who eagerly waited for
their pay. After having worked in the scorching sun, sweating and under harsh conditions,
they expected to be paid more than their colleagues who had worked for fewer hours than
they had. But all of them received the same wages, nothing more and nothing less.

The ones who had been hired first complained as they expected to be paid more than the
ones who had been hired after them. Their complaints were twofold: first, the ones who
were hired later than them were made equal to them in terms of pay; and second, they had
endured the burden of the work and the heat of the day to be paid the same wage as those
who had come later when the scorching sun’s rage had cooled down.

But the landowner responded that he was not being unfair and asked the complainants
‘didn’t you agree to work for a denarius?’ The workers were asked to take their pay and
go, with no word of gratitude. With the landowner adding that since it was his money, he
had the right to do what he wanted with it. The landowner considered himself generous
since he paid all workers equally. However, what is lacking in the landowner’s responses
to the workers is the relational aspect between himself and the workers. The workers are
regarded as means to meeting the ends of production by the landowner and not necessarily
as important in themselves. There is once more little room for dialogue as the human

165

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

dignity of the workers is not upheld; they seem to be objectified as mere means to have the
vineyard work done.

Context and manifestation of the Empire

We live in a time where harsh economic conditions constantly (mis)place people in the
‘marketplaces’ seeking for employment and means of survival. Times where workers’
labour inputs do not equal their wages.

We live in a context where many people are displaced from their land due to encroachment
by transnational corporations. A context where poor people’s lives and the environment
are exploited by the Empire without any semblance of dignity. Times where projects and
wealth creation supersede the value placed on the many workers who suffer tirelessly to
generate wealth for their employers. The labouring masses hardly benefit from the wealth
amassed from their sweat.

There are many examples of wealth generating projects found in African countries and
other countries in the global South. In our Bible study; we shall focus on South Africa.

Examples of human exploitation abound, but we shall look at one case that caused a lot
of tension and is still a hot subject in South Africa: the Marikana mine episode of 2012.
This story was carried in many newspapers in South Africa and beyond with contesting
views on the unrest, proving true that truth is always grey. However, in this Bible study
we shall use excerpts of the story as reported by The New York Times entitled ‘Mine
Strike Mayhem Stuns South Africa as Police Open Fire’, published on 16th August 2012
(Polygreen 2012). We shall read it in contestation with Keith Bryer’s story carried in
the Business Report entitled ‘Some hidden facts behind Marikana mine strike’ and was
published on 4th December 2012 (Bryer 2012).

The New York Times described the Marikana strike as being between Lonmin, the
Londonbased company that owns the mine and the trade union, as mine workers sought
an increment in pay, improvement of living and working conditions. As miners protested,
armed police shot into the charging crowd of miners, killing more than a dozen miners.
Two police officers and eight miners had died earlier as a result of the violence related to
the strike. Amidst the strike and protests, miners carried machetes, sticks and wooden
cudgels as they chanted and danced, pledging their readiness to die if their demands were
not met while accusing one of their unions of colluding with the owners of the mine.

166

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it?

Just before 4 p.m. on Thursday, after repeated warnings to the crowd of about 3 000 miners
to disarm and disperse, the police began firing tear gas and water cannons to try to get
them to leave, witnesses said. In a video captured by several news organisations, the police
appeared to fire upon a group of workers who charged toward them.

Police action and subsequent killing of miners received condemnation from various
quarters of society, equating it to the apartheid era characterised by police brutality.
President Jacob Zuma is quoted as having condemned the violence but did not criticise
the police, stating: ‘there is enough space in our democratic order for any dispute to be
resolved through dialogue without any breaches of the law or violence.’ He said he had
‘instructed law enforcement agencies to do everything possible to bring the situation
under control and to bring the perpetrators of violence to book.’

The strike is regarded as a reflection of a deep anger at the slow pace of South Africa’s
transformation, following failure by the government to provide housing to many South
Africans as per its promise. Another union observed that the strike was necessitated by the
workers’ anger and feelings of betrayal by the government in post-apartheid South Africa.

A version of this article appeared in print on August 17 2012, on page A8 of the New
York edition with the headline: ‘Strike by Armed Miners in South Africa Provokes a Fatal
Police Response’.
Keith Bryer, a communications consultant who has occasionally worked
for the platinum industry, writing in his personal capacity for the Business
Report exonerates Lonmin platinum and shifts blame on the miners and the
micro-lenders. These excerpts are taken from his article:
The strikers claimed to be all rock-drill operators in Lonmin’s platinum
mines and demanded a pay increase to R12 000 from R4 500. … So began
a series of reports condemning Lonmin for paying outrageously low wages.
… It was a picture of unfeeling capitalism, out of control police, rampant
exploitation, and a trade union woefully out of touch with its members.
Slowly more details emerged. Lonmin said it paid far more than R4 500
a month to rock-drill operators, closer to R10 000. The strike was not so
much about wages, but the result of an internecine battle for membership
between the established National Union of Mineworkers and a union that
was stealing its members and presumably their membership dues – a not
inconsiderable sum since the NUM allegedly has 300 000 members.

167

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

Lonmin claimed that rock-drill operators earned close to R10 000 a month.

Was it likely that hire-purchase payments had eaten into this wage leaving
only R4 500?
Also Lonmin said that it paid a living out allowance of R1 500 a month on
top of the wages it paid to rock drillers – in fact to everyone who preferred
to live off site or could not get into the converted hostels now turned into
family dwellings, nor into the brand new houses Lonmin was building.
Deductions for pension contributions, possibly for medical aid as well,
would also eat into basic pay.
[A] team of inspectors from the National Credit Regulator (NCR) swooped
on thirteen micro-lenders operating from the Marikana Township.
Micro-lenders are a new phenomenon. Some obey the rules, others do not
and are best described as loan sharks.
What the inspectors found was ‘severe indebtedness’ among miners
exacerbated by ‘malpractice by lenders and debt collection agents’. They
could have added slum landlords.
Although most micro-lenders were registered with the NCR the inspectors
found that many were in breach of a host of National Credit Act regulations
and criminal laws. Of the six searched on the first day, five were breaking
the law.
One possessed its borrowers’ ID books and credit cards which were being
used as ‘a collection method’.
Another routinely doubled the size of any loan if the collection was by means
of a garnishee order.
Such orders can only be granted by a court and under oath. One lender got
around this by using blank-signed process documents, including consent
to judgement, to persuade the mine employers to deduct from wages of the
debtor.
Affordability tests required by law appeared to be honoured only in the
breach.
Considering all the above, quite a different picture emerges of the causes of
the Lonmin strike and the rapid spread of demands for massive jumps in
wages, not through recognised unions, but often by workers’ committees led
by shop floor leaders. The bosses look less guilty now.

168

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it?

People undoubtedly live outside the mines in appalling conditions, but to pin
this all on mine management alone, as many non-governmental organisations
did at the start, and journalists initially took up with little investigation, is
knee-jerk anti-capitalism. (Bryer 2012)

From these two versions of the same story, what is evident is the vulnerability of the
miners in this economic dispensation. Whether this vulnerability is perpetuated and
exacerbated by the employers, consumerism among miners themselves, lack of political
will to safeguard and protect the miners’ interests or other economic factors like micro-
lenders, the end result is that miners end up as economic losers.

As in the Matthean account, the Marikana mine strike shows, first, a lack of dialogue
between the workers and employers. The wage is determined by the employer, with little
or no room for negotiation on the part of the miners. This lack of negotiation also shows
how economics without relational dimension is detrimental to human dignity as workers
end up being nothing more than means of production with no human faces to them.

Second, the Marikana situation resonates with the Matthean account as the low wages do
not empower the workers but instead act as a means of ensuring and furthering endless
dependence on the employer for daily survival. Low wages are nothing more than strings
that bind the workers to their employers. And when workers try to negotiate for decent
wages, the employer assumes he or she is already generous to them, hence, their demands
are viewed as unfounded.

Third, the vineyard workers in the Matthean account had skills limited to farming only,
thus, had little choice other than to go and work in the vineyard, no matter the harsh
working conditions, or run the risk of being jobless. The same can be said about the
Marikana miners. In a context where unemployment is high, these workers opt to endure
working under dangerous conditions rather than being in the ‘marketplace’ looking for
employment. Some of the miners are forced to take up such manual work that does not
pay them enough nor allow them to live decent lives, just to escape the marketplace.

Fourth, the working conditions in both the Matthean text and the Marikana context raise
a lot of concerns for the workers, such as having to work under dangerous and harsh
conditions. It is not far-fetched that some miners in companies in various countries work
without any protective clothing, rendering them vulnerable to various forms of infections
and injuries.

Finally, when economic and political forces join together on issues related to workers, the
workers usually have nowhere to seek solace from; with no-one willing to hear their voices.

169

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

Sometimes, the workers may speak, riot and strike but the question is ‘who is listening and
what are they doing about it?’

The coming together of economic and political powers and state machinery to disempower
the already disempowered in societies is a reality even in the Marikana context.

Unemployment, poor working conditions, unfair wages and poverty are not virtues but
systemic injustices that aim at perpetuating poverty among those who usually feel they
have no choice but to dance along to the tunes of the piper. Is God’s world really an animal
farm where only a few individuals should benefit from the sweat and labour of the masses?
Are all humans equal or indeed some humans are more equal than others on account of
their financial strength?

In light of the economic injustices in workplaces today, what then is the challenge to
individuals and contemporary communities?

Matthew 20:1-16: Challenges to

contemporary communities
The Matthew 20 text has a threefold challenge to individuals and contemporary Christian
communities, together with other faith communities.

First, it challenges us to take the plight of the working masses seriously. Their grievances
should not be dismissed without those in charge listening to them or even attempting to
understand their misgivings. Taking the plight of the working masses seriously is one way
of humanising them, hence the need to be in critical solidarity with the masses.

Second, faith communities must speak about the need to place people before any project,
no matter its economic benefits. Humans as the image of God need to be valued more than
any amount of wealth or project.

Finally, there is an urgent need to challenge the Empire in whichever form it may manifest
itself within our communities. The Empire must be told the truth about the dehumanisation
it continues to subject humans to. Our communities should call for paradigm shifts in how
economies are run, so that relational economics are applied instead.

170

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it?

Vision for alternatives

‘I came so that they may have life and life in its abundance’ offers a Biblical vision on the
plight of the working masses (John 10:10).

We need to ask ourselves ‘what is abundant life for the poor workers whose voices are
hardly heard by their employers and governments?’

ƒƒ Abundant life is about decent wages and not living wages.

ƒƒ Abundant life is about good living and housing conditions.
ƒƒ Abundant life is about safe working conditions, benefits and sound pensions.
ƒƒ Abundant life is about providing consistent healthy meals for their families.
ƒƒ Abundant life is being able to afford medical care and education for their families.
ƒƒ Abundant life is being heard and viewed as humans with feelings and not means to
an end.
ƒƒ Abundant life is a cultivation of sound relations between the workers and their
employers: Relational economics.
ƒƒ Abundant life is not dying in a quest for decent wages.

A poem
The Wage-slaves19
By Rudyard Kipling
OH, glorious are the guarded heights
Where guardian souls abide—
Self-exiled from our gross delights—
Above, beyond, outside:
An ampler arc their spirit swings—
Commands a juster view—
We have their word for all these things,
No doubt their words are true.

Yet we, the bond slaves of our day,

Whom dirt and danger press—
Co-heirs of insolence, delay,
And leagued unfaithfulness—
Such is our need must seek indeed

19 Poem available online at http://www.kiplingsociety.co.uk/poems_wageslaves.htm

171

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Bible and Theology from the Underside of Empire

And, having found, engage

The men who merely do the work
For which they draw the wage.

From forge and farm and mine and bench,

Deck, altar, outpost lone—
Mill, school, battalion, counter, trench,
Rail, senate, sheepfold, throne—
Creation’s cry goes up on high
From age to cheated age:
‘Send us the men who do the work
‘For which they draw the wage!’

Words cannot help nor wit achieve,

Nor e’en the all-gifted fool,
Too weak to enter, bide, or leave
The lists he cannot rule.
Beneath the sun we count on none
Our evil to assuage,
Except the men (sic) that do the work
For which they draw the wage.

When through the Gates of Stress and Strain

Comes forth the vast Event—
The simple, sheer, sufficing, sane
Result of labour spent—
They that have wrought the end unthought
Be neither saint nor sage,
But only men who did the work
For which they drew the wage.

Wherefore to these the Fates shall bend

(And all old idle things)
Wherefore on these shall Power attend
Beyond the grip of kings:
Each in his place, by right, not grace,
Shall rule his heritage—
The men who simply do the work
For which they draw the wage.

Not such as scorn the loitering street,

Or waste, to earth its praise,
Their noontide’s unreturning heat
About their morning ways;
But such as dower each mortgaged hour
Alike with clean courage—

172

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 God’s world is not an ‘Animal Farm’, or is it?

Even the men who do the work

For which they draw the wage—
Men, like to Gods, that do the work
For which they draw the wage—
Begin-continue-close that work.
For which they draw the wage!

A prayer
God of life, we remember the labouring masses throughout the world, whose sweat and labour do not
equal their earnings. May Jesus’ abundant life for all become a reality to the labouring masses. Grant
us as individuals and your church the courage to confront exploitative systems that dehumanize the
vulnerable in society. Give us the grace and strength to be in critical solidarity with all people that face
many other forms of economic injustices. To you, the God of justice we make our prayer. Amen.

Questions for personal and collective reflection

1. Within your own context, what are some of the challenges that ordinary workers
face?
2. How does the Empire manifest itself to create and perpetuate challenges faced by
the workers?
3. What is your role as an individual and the role of the church to alleviate the
injustices you have outlined?

References
Bryer K. 2012. Some hidden facts behind Marikana mine strike. Accessed 7 May 2016,
http://www.iol.co.za/business/opinion/some-hidden-facts-behind-marikana-
mine-strike-1435025
Polygreen L. 2012. Mine strike mayhem stuns South Africa as police fire. Accessed 7 May
2016, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/17/world/africa/south-african-police-
fire-on-striking-miners.html?

173

This content downloaded from 103.50.151.102 on Tue, 29 Aug 2023 03:10:10 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms