Preaching Paths 10 September 2023

Sally A. Brown, Professor Emerita, Princeton Theological Seminary

Today’s Gospel reading, Mt 18:15-20, is brief; yet its implications for the inter-relational life of Christians, assembling down the centuries for divine worship and public witness, has been profound. Jesus is not naïve; he anticipates that rifts and instances of personal failure among his disciples are inevitable. The spirit and process they bring to bear in such situations will be critically consequential for their mission.

Conflict related to ethnic and class differences, as well as rival understandings of Christian faith and ethics already plagued Christian assemblies in Matthew’s time. Little wonder that the gospel named for him devotes an entire chapter (ch 18) to community-sustaining practices, especially foundational attitudes and processes to mend rifts with truth and fairness. Bringing today’s text to bear in one’s particular congregation requires pastoral tact. A first step will be to absorb ch 18 as a whole. Notably, in its opening verses, Jesus establishes basic terms of engagement: humility and vulnerability like that of a child are the foundation of Christian self-understanding and therefore govern interpersonal relations.

A problem to be confronted at the outset is that two distinct variants of this text are well attested. Several early mss (see grammatical commentary) omit the words, “against you” (v 15). The vast majority of later mss include “against you.” The difference is quite consequential. If “sin against you” is our reading, then what is in view is a situation where one member of the assembly has been wounded by another’s action or words. Jesus is prompting the one “sinned against” not to complain or gossip, but move toward the agent of action to seek truthful reconciliation in the relationship. By contrast, if the text is, “If anyone sins,” then Jesus is outlining an official procedure whereby (designated?) members of the community identify, confront, and discipline a “sinner.” The text has in fact been used to legitimate and authorize ecclesiastical procedures that expose, sanction, and potentially excommunicate sinners. In the name of “purity,” Its application has sometimes been vindictive and merciless; its goal punitive, not restorative.

Yet, the tenor of vv 1-14, with its stress on childlike openness and humility, suggests that Jesus’ concern is restorative, not punitive. The three-step process Jesus lays out is humble in its approach, dialogical in its method, and restorative in its aim. As some commentators point out, additional members join the dialogue not to “gang up” on the “sinner,” but to broaden perspective on the dispute—perhaps even finding, as they listen and discuss, that the complainant, too, has mis-stepped. Restoration is multi-dimensional. Mutual compassion grows. Wisdom deepens for all who are involved.

The “binding and loosing” statement of v 18 has prompted endless debate. If we relate it to the restorative conflict-resolution process Jesus commends (which, incidentally, brilliantly avoids “triangulation” in relationships, the enemy of healthy community!), “binding and loosing” seems to allude to the results of the process: repair and restoration (“binding”), or a “loosing” of the bond of membership for the unreconciled. In later rabbinic texts, these terms referred to determining what was prohibited, what was permitted, in the community; these were decisions only an expert few were authorized to make. But Jesus has already called into question hierarchy itself! What governs among the childlike siblings of the reign of heaven is a vision of restorative justice, pursued in dialogue that is humble and vulnerable. This earthy, care-filled work is God’s will done on earth, in heaven (v 20).