
You can watch or read Elder Bednar’s talk at: Put On Thy Strength, O Zion (churchofjesuschrist.org)
Elder Bednar’s talk is based on the parable of the royal marriage feast found in Matthew Chapter 22.
In ancient times, one of the most joyous occasions in Jewish life was a wedding celebration—an event that would span a week or even two. Such an event required extensive planning, and guests were informed far in advance, with a reminder sent on the opening day of the festivities. An invitation from a king to his subjects to a wedding such as this was essentially considered a command. Yet, many of the bidden guests in this parable did not come.
Through this parable, Jesus is teaching that many of the Jews and their leaders were refusing to partake of the Gospel blessings offered to them by God.
How might we sometimes refuse God’s blessings?
The custom in those days was for the host of a wedding feast—in this parable, the king—to provide garments for the wedding guests. Such wedding garments were simple, nondescript robes that all attendees wore. In this way, rank and station were eliminated, and everyone at the feast could mingle as equals.
‘While the meaning of the required garment is not specified, elsewhere in the scriptures, garments and robes often symbolize righteousness and purity—qualities required to enter into the Lord’s presence (see Isaiah 61:10; Revelation 19:8; 2 Nephi 9:14; D&C 109:76). Today, the clothing worn in the temple symbolizes clothing ourselves in covenants, righteousness, and purity in preparation for entering into God’s presence. We cannot participate in the great “marriage supper” of the Son of God unless we have accepted and put on the protective clothing of His Atonement (see Revelation 19:8–9).’ (New Testament Institute Student Manual).
People invited from the highways to attend the wedding would not have had the time or means to procure appropriate attire in preparation for the event. Consequently, the king likely gave guests the garments from his own wardrobe. Everyone was given the opportunity to clothe themselves in garments of royalty.
“It was well known to the Savior’s audience that one had to be suitably dressed to appear before a king. The apparel of the guest was a reflection of respect for the host. It was also a matter of common knowledge that the appropriate dress for such an occasion was that of white robes (Clarke, Adam. Clarke’s Commentary. 3 vols. Nashville: Abingdon Press, no date given. 3:210). It appears evident that people brought in from the highways of the earth would have neither time nor means to procure wedding garments. The king had obviously supplied his guests from his own wardrobe. All had been invited to clothe themselves in the garments of royalty. (Joseph Fielding McConkie, Gospel Symbolism, 133.)
What do you think these royal garments represent?
As the king entered the wedding hall, he surveyed the audience and immediately noticed that one conspicuous guest was not wearing a wedding garment. The man was brought forward, and the king asked, “Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless.” In essence, the king asked, “Why are you not wearing a wedding garment, even though one was provided for you?”
If the man had come into the wedding feast by the door he would have been given a wedding garment by the king’s servants. Therefor, he must have gained entrance by some other way. We cannot gain entrance to the Kingdom of God except by authorised means.
A Christian author, John O. Reid, noted that the man’s refusal to wear the wedding garment exemplified blatant “disrespect for both the king and his son.” He did not simply lack a wedding garment; rather, he chose not to wear one. He rebelliously refused to dress appropriately for the occasion. The king’s reaction was swift and decisive: “Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
Why is it significant that the man deliberately chose not to wear a wedding garment?
The invitation to the wedding feast and the choice to partake in the feast are related but different. The invitation is to all men and women. An individual may even accept the invitation and sit down at the feast—yet not be chosen to partake because he or she does not have the appropriate wedding garment of converting faith in the Lord Jesus and His divine grace. Thus, we have both God’s call and our individual response to that call, and many may be called but few chosen.
The chosen are those who not only accept the invitation but also comply with the conditions of the invitation. How does this principle relate to the covenant path?
God does not have a list of favorites to which we must hope our names will someday be added. He does not limit “the chosen” to a restricted few. Instead, our hearts, our desires, our honoring of sacred gospel covenants and ordinances, our obedience to the commandments, and, most importantly, the Savior’s redeeming grace and mercy determine whether we are counted as one of God’s chosen.
We are not pre-destined to be or not to be chosen. We are agents not objects.
In the busyness of our daily lives and in the commotion of the contemporary world in which we live, we may be distracted from the eternal things that matter the most by making pleasure, prosperity, popularity, and prominence our primary priorities. Our short-term preoccupation with “the things of this world” and “the honors of men” may lead us to forfeit our spiritual birthright for far less than a mess of pottage.
What sort of things can distract us from the things that matter most? Are they inherently bad things?
Each of us should evaluate our temporal and spiritual priorities sincerely and prayerfully to identify the things in our lives that may impede the bounteous blessings that Heavenly Father and the Savior are willing to bestow upon us. And surely the Holy Ghost will help us to see ourselves as we really are.
What action will you take as a result of what you have learned from Elder Bednar’s talk?
NB: Passages in italics are direct quotes from Elder Bednar’s talk.