Matthew 18:21-35

This passage occurs in the RCL "Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2023. 
 
Summary:  A classic tale of forgiveness.  A man owes an absurd amount (Roughly 6 billion by my calculations).  After being forgiven he arrests his friend who owes him a couple thousand dollars.  I would like to put it in terms of relationship.  The man has misunderstood his relationship to God (as being a recipient of mercy) and his relationship to other humans (co-recipients and fellow-sharers of mercy).  This causes him to further sin.  Jesus warns us of dire consequences when we fail to understand the true nature of our relationship with God and with others.

I suggest this is Matthew's version of the prodigal God and prodigal son, except the younger son became the older son.

Show me the money

μυριων ταλεντων ("ten thousand talents", 18.24)  A talent is roughly 5,000 to 6,000 denarii.  This means that 10,000 talents is like 500,000 denarii.  A denarii is a roughly a day's wages.  @120/day this is about 6 billion!  (Or almost 2,000 years of labor).  In comparison the few hundred denarii would be about $30,000.  That is quite a difference.

Theologically significant words

σπλαγχνισθεις (form of σπλαγχνιζομαι, meaning "compassion", 18.27)  The master has compassion on the slave.  This is also the word that describes the father's heart toward the son in the prodigal son.  That a father would have this kind of compassion for his son is not the most shocking; however, in this case, the master has compassion on his servant.  This kind of compassion and forgiveness suggests to me that the master is grafting this slave into the family, although the slave doesn't realize it.

αφηκεν (from αφιημι) and απελυσεν (from απολυω)  Both of these verbs, which appear throughout the story, are related.  The first means "forgive" or "let go"; the second means "set free."  It is interesting that even though the slave's debt was freed, the relationship status did not change.  To what extent was he freed?   It is an interesting parable in that the masters work of forgiving and setting free does not change the heart of the person.  Tough to ponder.  When we view (and even experience) the relationship between us and God as a transaction and not an opportunity for transformation we always go awry.  

ελεησαι (from ελεεω, meaning show mercy, 18.33)  To the extent this is revealing about God, the point is that God does not simply possess mercy, but actively shows mercy.  Mercy is rarely an adjective (merciful), sometimes a noun (mercy) but most likely a verb with God as the subject: "show mercy."

Likely lost in translation:

ειπεν vs λεγει (18:21)  Both of these are different tenses of the same verb.  ειπεν is aorist; λεγει is present.  The aorist usually connotes a single action whereas the present suggests an on-going action.  Peter asks one time: "How often..." but Jesus repeatedly says, "7*70".  Jesus needed to repeat himself for this to be heard.

"will sin" vs "would sin" (Future vs. Subjunctive:  Sins aren't subjunctive in this case!)  

The Greek language is obsessed with the future.  There are multiple ways to show the future implications of a given action.  Worth noting is that there is no future subjunctive.  Either something will happen in the future or it might happen starting from this moment forward in an unknown time.  But you cannot do "might happen in the future"; that simply means might happen.  Today, when Peter is asking Jesus about forgiving others, he does not put the verb αφησω (forgive) in the subjunctive.  The whole sentence is in the future.  In short, Peter expects sin and forgiveness. The sentence literally reads: "How often will my brother sin against me and will I forgive him? Until seven times?"

ει τι ("whatever" 18.28)  The exact construction of the phrase "Pay what you owe me" is rather interesting. It actually includes an "ει τι" phrase. This phrase is normally translated "if anything," as if to say, the man was not even really sure what the debt was, if in fact, it was anything.

συνδουλος ("fellow-slave" 18:28, 29, 31, and 33)  The Greek can put "fellow" and "slave" together in one word.  Powerful word.  Fellow slave.  Do we view each other as fellow slaves to sin!

βασανισταις (-στης, meaning "jailer" or "torturer", 18.34)  This is a hard word.  I don't like the idea of one being tortured.  On the one hand, the word means "jailer" so perhaps Jesus is simply referring to the act of the imprisonment.  The other way to think about this is that the word torture in Greek comes from the word test.  Perhaps this slave is put up to another time of testing, this time hopefully to succeed.  The word comes from a rag that was used to test whether gold was real.  The person needs to go and discover what he really is - a sinner yet a child of God!

δανειον  ("debt"; 18.27) The use of this word for "debt" here is unique in the NT.  The word normally carries with it a suggestion of interest, even usury with this debt.  Most simply it means a loan.  God is calling the loan and then forgives it.  What has God loaned you!?  It is interesting that in this parable, like the other classic parable of talents, the talents are loaned. never earned.  

παρακαλεω ("encourage"/"plead"; 18.29, 32)  The word for Holy Spirit is derived from this word:  "paraclete".  I want to connect Holy Spirit, pleading and forgiveness, but I can't quite sew this thread together.  Anyway, putting it here for someone else to run with it!

Binding of Sins (Matthew 18:15-20)

Note:  This post comes out of my 2023 sermon on Matthew 18:15-20.  I will focus on the word "bind."  However, you can access my post on Matthew 18:15-20 or John 20:19-31.

I want to reflect a bit more on what Jesus means when he says "Truly I tell you, whatever you BIND on earth will be BOUND in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven."  I offer that this word "bind" (δεω) might have three meanings.

• Classic medieval: The binding, along with the loosing, refers to the keys of heaven which are given to the church (see Matthew 16:19).  These keys of loosing and binding will open and close the door.  As the church chooses to absolve or not absolve sins, people are moved in or blocked from heaven.
• Rabbinic:  A movement has picked up in recent scholarship to view the "binding" and "loosing" referring to the Rabbinic practice of determining, within a community, what was "bound", that is "sinful" and what was "loose", that is ''permitted." 
• Pastoral:  The binding refers here to the act of restoring a lost sheep by binding sins to Christ.

I want to unpack each of these, describe the Scriptural argument for each, its implications and its shortcomings.

Classic Medieval

In a nutshell:  The classic understanding of the office of the keys is nicely summarized by Martin Luther in his small catechism:

What is the Office of the Keys?  The Office of the Keys is the special authority which Christ has given to His Church on earth: to forgive the sins of the penitent sinners, but to retain the sins of the impenitent as long as they do not repent.

(See footnote for a longer passage of Luther) 

It is worth noting that the medieval Roman Catholic church and Luther were in agreement about what the keys did (see Aquinas on the office of the keys belonging to the church).  Luther disagreed about whether the keys belonged to the "holy Roman Catholic church" or the "holy catholic church, the communion of saints" and how the keys were dealt with through the sacramental system.

Biblical support:  All of this understanding arises from Matthew 16, Matthew 18 and John 20, in which Jesus gives the apostles authority to forgive sins and retain them.  It is worth noting that the wording is different in Matthew and John, with Matthew using the words "bind" and "loosen" and John using the words "forgive" and "hold/retain/grasp."

Implications and Shortcomings:  The mission of the church becomes clear:  act as a gate keeper for who is in and who is out of the Kingdom of God.  This clarifies and perhaps simplifies the task of the church in an age when the objectives often seem political and social.  

However, the church doors, physically and spiritually, become hard boundaries of God's mercy on earth.  As discipleship in Jesus moves from a Jewish renewal movement to an inter-continental institution, this boundary becomes a wall and the institution abuses its power, time and time again.

It also makes the point of life "getting into heaven" rather than experiencing eternal life, which begins here and now, as Jesus comes to us.

Rabbinic

In a nutshell:  This way of thinking might be new to some.  The binding and loosing, in this view, refer to the process by which community leaders, Rabbis, would determine what was morally permissible (or not) for a community.  A good article I found online by the author Kindalee Pfremmer De Long outlines it.  As she writes

In this practice of [rabbinic] binding and loosing, rabbis uphold the law as eternal and universal but recognize that new contexts require new decisions about how to bind or loose particular behaviors. 

Biblical support:  In the article by De Long, she delves more deeply into historical and linguistic support of this interpretation, which she acknowledges is solid but not exhaustively conclusive.  It is not a strictly biblical argument, per se, but one in which extra-Biblical sources allow us to better understand what the original authors (or in this case, the original speaker, Jesus) likely meant.

De Long also does not dismiss the classic way of understanding this passage.  She offers that both people may be bound or loosed (classic) and that laws or ethical standards may be bound or loosed (rabbinic).  I resonated with De Long's article, not simply in substance, but also tone.  She wrote in a generous spirit - rather than a "everyone got it wrong because we/I've discovered this social science data from the 1st century that upends everything you knew", she approached it with a "there is likely another layer to this that has impact for ministry" attitude.

Implications and Shortcomings:  In this way of thinking, Christian communities become loci of ethical and moral discernment.  For a community to exist, there must be agreed upon standards of behavior, processes for determining these standards and then means by which people are restored to the community. 

The Rabbinic perspective returns to the Achilles' heal for Protestants - once you've left the institution AND acknowledged that differences are inevitable, on what basis can you find unity and on what basis will your ethical teachings stand?  And furthermore, why attend a church that doesn't suit your moral proclivities, which increasingly means your political stances?  Like, if you disagree with your church's moral conclusion about some issue, why not leave?  In short, if your church is going to stake its hat on getting it right morally and you don't agree, why stay?

Pastoral

As a western and American, living in the 21st century, I live in just about the most autonomous and individualized culture in the earth's history.  Never before have people been less grounded in their past, including both family of origin and even biological gender.   In short, we tend to trust our feelings and are motivated to create a life, a story, an identity for ourselves, often over and against the entities that brought us to bear.  Our participation in society often amounts to signaling our virtue more than bearing one another's burdens and we move to "cancel" rather than listen.  

This all makes me acutely hungry for Matthew 18 and Jesus words about community.  More and more, in fact, I sense that God's Kingdom is a place where this individualism dissolves in Christ's grace.  I can stop having to create myself and simply let Christ define me.  While I retain a sense of distinction from others -- we do not become a blob -- I am finally able to get over myself in a way that I can be for others.  God's Kingdom allows for real community, truly communion, with God of course, but also with others.  In that light, I very much appreciated Rolf Jacobson's article about the community dynamics within Matthew 18.  Jacobson helps these words of the binding and loosing be heard in their context, namely, that of a good shepherd finding lost sheep.

If Jesus is indeed speaking about bringing people into "Life Together" as Bonhoeffer called it, what might binding look like?  Fascinatingly, Bonhoeffer ends his book with a chapter on Confession and Communion.  He extols the virtues of confession and bases participation in Holy Communion on confession.  Yet he does not mention binding of sins, but rather the proclamation of forgiveness. 

In short, a community needs to bind and loosen laws in terms of structuring life together, but given the reality of sin (see again Jacobson's article), inevitably we fill mess up before God and each other.  The only way forward is forgiveness and reconciliation.  Does this mean, then, that we have left the binding of sins behind or simply see binding as the way to remove people from the community?

μη γενιοτο (heck no!)  The community needs something bound in order for the key of loosing to work.  Sin must be dealt with.  The only binding that can actually hold a community together, then is confession and absolution, which is a binding of the sin to the cross and the freeing of the new creation for life together.

In reality, this binding will likely take weeks and be on-going given the capacity for humans to hurt ourselves and each other.  We will again and again need to bind the old sinner to the cross - our shame, our guilt, our pride, our fears, everything.  While I cannot prove it, I sense that a congregation that truly experiences this kind of forgiveness, not simply from the pulpit, but from each other (as Bonhoeffer envisions) is the kind of church that will cohere even when people disagree.  

***

PS  Longer Luther passage on the keys:

"We possess these two keys through Christ's command.  The key which binds it the power or office to punish the sinner who refuses to repent by means of a public condemnation to eternal death and separation from the rest of Christendom... The key which binds carries forward the work of the law.  It is profitable to the sinner in as much as it reveals to him his sins, admonishes him to fear God, causes him to tremble and moves him to repentance and not to destruction." ("The Keys", pg 372, LW 40)

Matthew 18:15-20

This passage occurs as a New Testament Lesson in the RCL "Pentecost"/"Ordinary"/"Proper" Season, Year A, most recently September 2023 . 
 
Summary:  Jesus seems to let us off the hook today, telling us we can treat sinning Christians like gentiles and tax collectors, as long as we've gone through the appeal court system.  However, this is the worst news of all, because Jesus spends most of his time eating with tax collectors and even getting harassed for his association with them.  In other words, Jesus doesn't give us permission to drop them, but rather instructs us to bear them, teach them and even get persecuted because we continue to care for them over and against their difficulties toward us.  Yes, he does let us remove our heart strings a bit from them, but not our moral obligation.  Hence why Jesus has to promise us his presence in the midst of conflict!

Key Words:
αδελφος (brother/sister; found throughout section)  Earlier in Matthew's Gospel, Jesus refers to his followers as his brothers and sisters (12:49).  He is telling his disciples that in the church they are also brothers and sisters to one another.  

εκερδησας (from κερδαινω, "to gain", 18:15)  Jesus puts it beautifully:  If he listens to you, you have gained back your brother.  It is not about winning people to your side, but restoring the relationship!  

Additional 2023 note:  That this passage occurs after the story of the (Good) shepherd finding the lost sheep might be lost on the normal preacher, because the lectionary leaves that story for the year of Luke.  Dr Rolf Jacobson offers a nice connection between the two stories.  He argues, correctly I believe, that the latter story reveals this story is about Jesus working to reconnect the lost to the flock.

ακουω & παρακουω ("listen" and "listen aside", 18:15, 16 and 17)  Jesus does not say "if he apologizes" or "if he agrees"; he simply says, "if he listens."  If we can listen to each other, we make room for reconciliation.  In fact, in order to get the point of agreement (vs 19), we must first reestablish the relationship (15).  

Jesus introduces a word that is rare in the New Testament: παρακουω.  That ακουω is part of it should be readily clear.  What is added is the preposition/prefix:  παρα.  This means alongside of.  So this verb means "to hear aside", ie not hear directly, not focus, not pay attention.  Definitely an indictment of our culture today!

εθνικος (pagan, gentile, literally "ethnic"; 18:17)  Jesus suggests we treat Christians who have greatly sinned against us as gentiles.  Interestingly, Jesus final words in the Gospel of Matthew instruct us to preach to the gentiles (all the nations of the world; same root word) and earlier Jesus reminds us to love our enemies.  Jesus is not giving us permission to be rude and dismissive to our brothers and sisters in Jesus, even those whom we are angry with.

τελωνης ("tax collector"; 18:17)  Jesus eats with tax collectors.  He repeatedly takes heat for being seen with them.  So considering someone a tax collector means something more like this:  "Treat them in such a way that no one knows how much they anger and embarrass you, bearing your cross and thanking God for this opportunity to become a more patient and compassionate person."

δησητε (form of δεω, meaning "bind"; 18:18)  Bind does not mean declare forgiven.  (In another post, I explore the historical meanings of this word within the context of "The Keys").  

1)  It means to forgive, understood in connection with Matthew 16 and John 20 as the priestly office of the keys

2)  It means to declare something taboo.  Marriage is a binding of two people together, which means that certain actions are permitted, but also that certain actions are no longer permitted.  This is interesting that in order for their to be life together, there has to be an established set of norms.

3)  I offer it means to bind sins to Christ.

συμφωνησωσιν ("agree" or "match", from συμφωνεω; 18:19)  The actually meaning of this word is not that interesting.  What is interesting is the derivation, "symphony" which means "together-sounds."  Jesus says that if we make a symphony, God listens.  Haha!  Also worth noting that this coming together takes place within a story about renewing of relationships and returning of lost sheep to the fold.  This is NOT then, simply two people coming together, but two people who were previously at odds.

επι της γης ("upon the earth", 18:19)  I want to point out something in the Greek overlooked in most translations -- Jesus says that if two or three on the earth agree, God in heaven will act.  This would suggest that people coming together is bridge between heaven and earth.  Reconciliation is a thin space, so speak.  The God in heaven responds to people on earth, when we find unity.  While this sounds like we are the agents of reconciliation, remember the context: the shepherd finding the lost sheep.

This passage also underscores a fundamental theme in the Bible:  Humans are estranged from each other.

συνηγμενοι ("gathered"; passive perfect participle from "συναγω"; 18:20)  This participle covers up a familiar word:  synago, from which we get synagogue.  The voice is significant here.  We do not gather ourselves in the church, but rather are gathered God.  Thus, we are moving  from human action to God's promise. Also worth noting that Jesus promises his presence in the midst of the office of the keys and congregational conflict.  The church is a gift, however human and sinful it can be!

εν μεσω ("in the midst", 18:20)  Matthew begins his Gospel by declaring Jesus to be Immanuel -- God with us.  Matthew ends his Gospel with Jesus declaring he is God with us.  In the middle of the Gospel Jesus affirms this as his mission (and identity) when he declares that, at the crossroads of worship and conflict, he is with us.

 
Translation Issue:  Hypothetical situations with εαν

Technically, this word is a combination of:  ει αν, both of which are "subjunctive" markers.  Put them together and you have a very hypothetical situation.  If you have the word εαν, the writer/speaker is not specifying if this will actually happen.  It means something like, "if" or perhaps "whenever."  If is used in Greek to set up a simple phrase (so necessary for science), if-then.  So in our text for this week, Jesus is not promising conflict; nor is he promising that people will not listen.  He is simply saying, "If you experience this, well, then do this..."

Also worth noting:  Every other verse in this section has an "if" clause, yet in 18:20 Jesus simply declares -- Where two or three are gathered, I am in the midst of you.