Sally A. Brown, Professor Emerita, Princeton Theological Seminary
Inexhaustible forgiveness is at the center of today’s Gospel reading, Mt 18:21-35. On the face of it, Peter’s query, Jesus’ reply, and the parable that follows seem straightforward. The message is clear: always be ready to forgive. Yet details of this text, especially the parable, prompt questions: What is the relationship of forgiveness to accountability and justice? Is immediate forgiveness always called for? Must we forgive offenders whose fault is obvious, but who deny any wrongdoing?
Peter asks Jesus whether one should forgive one’s fellow disciple (“brother”) “seven times. This reminds us that we are still talking, as earlier in the chapter, about life in the community of faith. Since seven is a Jewish expression of completeness or fulfillment, Peter may be asking whether forgiveness needs to be inexhaustible, rather than asking for a specific number. Jesus’ reply—whether translated “seventy-seven” or “seventy-times-seven” points to unlimited forgiveness.
Jesus’ parable is a fable-like sketch, gilded with hyperbole. The debt the king’s servant owes is absurdly great. (A. West notes that the national debt of entire countries is considerably smaller.)[1] Absurd, too, is the king’s forgiveness of this massive debt, declared when the servant falls on his knees pleading—but seeking only for leniency, not pardon. When the king learns that his pardoned servant has turned around and imprisoned someone who owed him a pittance, the king retracts his pardon and sends the servant “to torture” (more hyperbole). What are we to make of this?
The king’s reversal does, in fact, seem consistent with Matthew’s version of the Lord’s Prayer. Jesus teaches his disciples to pray that God should forgive “as we have forgiven our debtors” (Mt 6:12). Does God indeed refuse forgiveness to the unforgiving? This may be Mt’s meaning. Or might even human failure to forgive itself be forgiven by the God who well knows our human weakness?
There is broad pastoral consensus today that survivors of physical, sexual, or emotional abuse should not be forced to forgive their abusers. Some abuse survivors may eventually bring themselves to take such a step; but only in a situation in which the abuser has taken responsibility for the damage done. There is a world of difference between an exchange of repentance and forgiveness, on one hand, and pretending that nothing ever happened, on the other. The latter sort of cover-up can enable and perpetuate abuse, down generations. These realities need to be discussed in preaching.
We do well to keep in mind that parables are not intended as point-for-point analogues to human experience, but broad-brush, sometimes hyperbolic sketches. Jesus is not prescribing steps to take in every web of debts owed and pardons extended or denied. As stories, parables introduce interactive possibilities that need to be explored. Keeping in mind, first, ch 18’s concern throughout with “rules of engagement” among Christians, as well as the pattern of forgiveness in Mt 6:12, will aid interpretation. Hurt inflicted and suffered is inevitable in human communities; but Christians strive not to give up on one another, even if forgiveness seems, in some cases, a remote possibility, at best. Still, we refuse to close that door. We, the forgiven, know our calling: to make real in this often-merciless world the astonishing, inexhaustible, restorative mercy of God.
[1] See, for example, Audrey West, https://www.workingpreacher.org/commentaries/revised-common-lectionary/ordinary-24/commentary-on-matthew-1821-35.
Insights into Biblical Greek Grammar and Syntax 