Diarmuid devoted the day to examining the parables in the Gospels. He quoted C.H. Dodd who said: “At its simplest the parable is a metaphor or simile, drawn from nature or common life, arresting the listener by its vividness or strangeness – and leaving the mind in sufficient doubt about its precise application to tease it into active thought’ He went on later to quote Sean Freyne who explained: “Just at the point in the story line when the reader is lured into its internal logic, (the parable) takes an unexpected and unforeseen twist, and one is left wondering what the point really was. As a pedagogic device, this unusual twist in the story line engages the hearer’s imagination to rethink their own presuppositions and re-evaluate their notions on what the “Kingdom of God” might really be like.” (Sean Freyne, 2014, 161)
Diarmuid then took some parables and explained them, showing that they were subversive messages that went through a process of orientation (telling the story), disorientation (where the real meaning emerges) and reorientation (where the values of the kingdom are expressed).