Remaking community,

through correction and forgiveness

(Mt 18:15-20.21-35)

In Mt 18 Jesus seems to be concerned about fraternal life in his community. He admits that sin is an undeniable fact when brothers live together but he neither excuses it through being complicit nor does he tolerate it being connived at. This is something in the Congregation that we need to take note of.

This afternoon we would like to understand and take up the care for the common life that Jesus demands of his followers. The Christian community, which knows it is not exempt from sin, needs to know how to act when a brother sins. The fact of not being able to avoid sin in its midst, does not exempt it from having to tackle the sinner through correction (Mt 18:15-20) and forgiveness (Mt 18:18,21-35). The order of the rules Jesus gives is significant: forgiveness is owed to the brother once he is corrected. One must show mercy to a brother once there has been an effort made towards his conversion.

1.The Gospel text on fraternal correction

In Mt 18:15-20 Jesus requires fraternal correction of those who live in common and also points out a precise way of going about it. This community practice of correction becomes so important for him, that he does not hesitate to back up his demand with amazing promises.

The text in hand has eight sentences, divided into two blocks. Brother is the key word in one paragraph which establishes the approach to be followed in dealing with offences committed within the community (Mt 18:15-17).

• The first five sentences (Mt 18:15-17) [please note that this is so in the Italian text, not necessarily so in English or other languages, both for number of sentences and the moods and tenses and other grammatical features referred to from here on] are formulated in a similar way: they concern a situation, expressed in the conditional mood, and offer a solution, expressed in the imperative: in cases of this kind one is to act as indicated here. There is no escape possible: they are ‘norms by divine right’.

• The three that follow (Mt 18:18-20) are by way of motivation. Separation is evident in the change from tu ('you' familiar) to voi/essi (more formal), in the emphatic introduction (Mt 18:18.19) and, especially, in how the theme is treated. What the community decides will be confirmed by God, so long as it is a praying community.

The fact that a disciplinary procedure is established presupposes tensions within the community. Jesus admits the reality of sin, and that's why he offers precise norms for seeking to correct the sinner. By dictating the path that correction should follow, this becomes inescapable: if we know what we should be doing then it becomes 'unforgivable' not to correct the one who has offended.

2.Some highlights

Seeking correction for the offender (Mt 18:15-17a)

Jesus wants his disciples to exercise fraternal correction in the community. We should note that the norms he has established are not directed to those who exercise authority in the Church but to those who have been the victim of their brother's offence. Correction is not, specifically the task of governance, but a fundamental obligation amongst brothers: “It is not the offender but the offence which seeks reconciliation” (John Chrysostom).

A brother in common life should not be abandoned to his fate, even though he might have mistreated me. In reality the first reaction expected of the one who has been offended is not to forgive the one who has offended him (Mt 18:15: contro di te! (in the Italian text)), but to go looking for him to correct him. Forbidding revenge does not mean ignoring the offence. Taking refuge in indifference does not diminish the fault. Jesus, because he has in mind that sin happens amongst brothers and therefore takes it seriously, indicates the way to correct it, setting out the precise steps to be followed. By telling us that we need to correct and who must do so, he lets us see how it matters to him that we are concerned for the good of the one who does wrong to us.

We need, first of all, to get out of the public eye: the offender has to be tackled in private (Mt 18:15b; cfr. Lev 19:17). This is more about setting things right than it is a reprimand; the aim is to convince, not to humiliate; seek consensus, not shame someone. The disciple who has been offended, therefore, must persuade his offender of his sin in private, so that not so much the fault as the correction remains hidden and the honour of the offender is protected. In fact correction tries to win the brother back, making a neighbour of the offender and restoring him as a brother to the community. The Christian who has been offended is not content with exercising justice or re-establishing honour, but seeks to restore community life.

Then Jesus realistically takes into account, secondly the failure of this first attempt. If a private effort does not achieve conversion, then the offence needs t be made public and we need to have recourse to witnesses. Witnesses are not there to confirm the imputation (the accusation). Nor are they there to support the reasoning of the one who is publicly seeking to set things right. Their simple presence makes fraternal correction a communal and therefore a more trustworthy thing. Now it is not only the one offended who is waiting for a change of behaviour. The invitation to put things right now becomes more urgent, less excusable.

If he does not accept correction, the offender is to be brought before the community, the third and supreme case. The offended believer has no greater authority than this to appeal to. The community's role is not to condemn. Rather does it support the one offended in his attempt at persuasion. The possible result, breakdown in communion, confers unusual gravity on this third attempt. After this there is no other chance of winning back one's brother. Because thinking of a believer as a gentile or pagan would mean denying him the community of life, certifying that he no longer has anything more in common with it or them. It foresees that the person offended no longer regards his impenitent offender as his brother. It imposes excommunication - if not from the Church, at least from the one offended (Mt 18:17: “sia per te” (in the Italian text)). The one who offends and does not correct his ways is no longer my brother… if I have made all the efforts to achieve that. It is not out of revenge that I cast him out of my life, but out of obedience to my Lord!

Limitations of community life (Mt 18:17b)

Uncorrected sin places the sinner beyond the realm of fellowship. The one who has offended his brother, by refusing correction, persists in mistreating him. The approach imposed after every failed attempt at reconciliation, reveals the malice behind every offence against a brother: sinning against him cannot remain without its consequences.

It is the one offended - let us not forget it – who must seek his offender's salvation. Instead of complaining about the injury, magnifying the wrongdoing, he is to take care of his offender. There is no doubt that much more is being asked of the one offended than of the offender. Jesus does not ask whether the offended brother wants to or not, nor whether he is up to it; the correction is an order and he details the steps to be taken.

Also and still more seriously, just as the one offended must seek to correct his offender, so also he cannot avoid the breakdown that will occur if it is not accepted. The sinner who obstinately transgresses against fellowship exiles himself from community life. He no longer deserves to live as a brother – amongst brothers – if he does not accept correction within community.

Jesus' role

The exclusion of the one who reflects correction is inevitable, but it does not have to be permanent (cf. Mt 13:37-38.41). What is final is Jesus' promise that guarantees the success of the decisions and requests of a community interested in its brother by wanting him to be better than he is, that is, doing everything possible to quickly correct him. Jesus has fraternal correction so much at heart that he offers the community three amazing promises for his part.

Heaven and earth are together in this (Mt 18:18)

Jesus here ratifies the decision taken in community as valid in heaven too, it will be ratified there. Bindind and loosing, a technical biblical formula, expresses the capacity to decide, forbid, allow. This power, granted to Peter (Mt 16:19: the primate!), is now recognised within the local community (Mt 18:3.10.12.13).

Even before the community takes the decision to exclude the one who has broken with community and will not repent, Jesus has assured them that God will support such a serious decision. One can be sure – Jesus confirms – that God will support the decision taken by the obedient community, if it remains united in prayer. Because, and we should not forget this, having to consider a brother to be a sinner and publican is, for the community, the result of obedience to its Lord. Separating from the one who will not correct himself is imposed by Christ, it is not just a whim of the Christian concerned.

All-powerful prayer (Mt 18:19)

The disciplinary interventions of the community are not then simply acts of human administration, as just or as appropriate to the facts as they may be. They happen within the context of common prayer: they are acts of piety towards God and not gestures of revenge against the offender. They can count on divine approval if done in obedience to God, to his presence. Concern for the sinner, making efforts towards his conversion, remains therefore, anchored in fraternal … and all-powerful prayer! But be careful here: a remade community, or one that has at least made the effort to be so, is required for prayer to be heard.

The power of the praying community presupposes internal harmony which necessarily implies the practice of forgiveness (cf. Mt 18:21-35). Seeking to win God's favour without at least trying to win over the soul of the brother one prays with is bound for failure. The community becomes all-powerful when it prays together in unity, even though tensions within it are the reason for this prayer: these are only alluded to in this context.

The Lord's presence (Mt 18:20)

The ultimate motivation includes the promise of the Risen Lord's presence amongst his own (cf. Mt 28:20). Communion of life amongst Christians ensures Christ's presence amongst them: int he world, until He returns, the Christian community, insignificant though it may be, is the Lord's abode, the place where he dwells. What makes Christian presence meaningful in the world is Christ's presence in the community, not power or the number of Christians there are (two or three, cf. Acts 4:32). It is not the mere handful of people who have come together but the reasons for their doing so, the Lord, which confers power on community prayer life.

When we forget this, our community life loses power and meaning… and maybe for us too! Christ is present amongst his own, who need to be believers in full accord or because they have brought back their brother who sinned or because they excluded the impenitent sinner: the Christian community is the place where He lives, if it lives reconciled. We should not overlook that such presence is assured for the community who judges the impenitent one and denies him communion, because this is a ruling from its Lord.

Those who wish to have the Lord in their midst should not be indulgent with the sinner in their midst and should pray and live in communion. Counting on the Lord being amongst us and being able to count on prayer with the omnipotence of our God are readily available for those who do everything possible to win their brother back, correcting him if he has fallen, and to maintain unity in community life, refusing to recognise as a brother the one who persists in his sin. It is not something we do arbitrarily, but an injunction from our Lord.

3.The Gospel text on unlimited forgivenessi

A question from Peter interrupts Jesus' speech (Mt 18:21) and introduces a new problem: from correction of an aggressor we pass on to fraternal forgiveness; from what has to be done to what cannot be refused.

Jesus' answer, developed over two instances, goes – as usual – beyond the disciple's initial question: firstly Jesus establishes unlimited forgiveness (Mt 18:21-22); hen he motivates it with the parable of the debtor who had his own debtors in turn (Mt 18:23-25). The Christian always finds himself in double debt of forgiveness: what he himself needs from God and what he owes to his neighbour.

4.Some highlights

In the beginning it was the disciples who were asking (Mt 18:1), now it is only Peter (Mkt 8:29; 9:5; 10:28; 11:21). As the spokesman for the disciples, this is placed here, as with the earlier case with Jesus (Mt 18:15), from the point of view of someone who has been offended. The question does not presuppose that the offender has sought forgiveness, nor even that he wants to. Penitence is not a prior condition for forgiveness.

Peter takes it for granted that he must forgive. What interests him is knowing whether the forgiveness he must give can be measured or quantified (cf. Mt 5:21-48). In Peter's question however, it is implicit that forgiving, which is a very serious matter, must have an end to it somewhere: seven would be the limit one would not go beyond. He was being extremely generous.

Jesus replies by contradicting this way of thinking of Peter's and asking him to have unlimited readiness to forgive. It is not a matter of counting when to stop forgiving but to forgive without counting

The Christian community must not liken itself to Adam's family, which knew revenge, although of a limited kind (Gen 4:24). Forgiveness amongst believers is unlimited: only where forgiveness has the last word can good finally win out. Indeed, only forgiveness can save the Christian community form ruin. It is in its capacity to forgive that we find the novelty in its life.

Forgiveness made possible (Mt 18:23-35)

Mt 18:23-35, a parable which belongs to Matthew, closes this passage. Even thoguh it deals with forgiveness, it should not be considered as a simple illustration. In fact, it does not consider unlimited forgiveness of a brother but the obligation to forgive that someone forgiven by God has: the one who does not forgive is not imitating the one who forgave him. This way we discover the deep reason for the forgiveness that is due, without limits, to the brother who offends: in order to forgive one needs to be aware of having been forgiven.

The parable paints a rather improbable situation, though it could happen. The servant's debt with his master (10,000 talents) would be a tough one to meet; the servant could not pay it in a lifetime, nor would selling his entire family be able to meet that figure. Furthermore it is unlikely that someone would receive such a loan or have such an extraordinary unbalanced debt. The evangelist is trying to highlight the greatness of divine mercy: what the official owes his master is around 100 million times what is owed to him.

The parable wants to illustrate not the quantity, but quality of Christian forgiveness, which is without measure. More than motivating unlimited forgiveness, it reveals the reasons behind its lack of limits. The one who is called to forgive does not control forgiveness. He is unable to free himself of this obligation, and nor can he put limits to it. In the emphatic final question (Mt 18:33), the parable reveals its key: the one forgiven must forgive. Grace is a gift which has to be practised, not something we enjoy alone. There will be no second chance for the one who does not forgive: the grace granted him will be withdrawn and he will be condemned forever. In fact, he will be punished until he pays…an unpayable debt!

Jesus proclaims a God who is sovereign in forgiving and demanding, he condones and condemns without limit. He who does not forgive once, will not be definitively forgiven, even though he has been forgiven many times. In this parable Jesus has not directly responded to Peter's question (Mt 18:21). Nobody can think he has already forgiven enough, if he himself continues to need forgiveness. The Christian would be free from the obligation to forgive if he had no need of God's forgiveness.

No one is condemned for another's sin, but for having refused to forgive others their debts, given that one has been previously forgiven himself: the one who does not forgive with all his heart is condemned forever. Having a God who forgives converts his servants into people who forgive. A merciful Father demands that his children be merciful (Mt 5:48/Lk 6:36). God, who at the end condemns his debtor, does not do so because he has not satisfied his debt, but because he does not remove his brother's debt: the grace gained is then lost when one does not live with this kind of gratuity, when when does not freely give.

Jesus puts us on our guard with this parable, firstly from hardness of heart that can see us lose what we have already won: grace given that does not produce compassion becomes eternal disgrace. On the other hand we need to accept that God's forgiveness has limits, it can be lost although once granted and not because God is not ready to offer it but because he can withdraw it. A community that can lose God's forgiveness must be more generous in granting it. And precisely because divine forgiveness has limits, fraternal forgiveness should not have limits.

[Reminder of the spiritual work already indicated, cf. Day two. Presentation, p. 2].

There is not a single episode in the Gospels tying Mary to correction and forgiveness amongst brothers. The 'Christian' Mary of the Acts lives in community, together with the apostles “joined in continuous prayer” (Acts 1,:3: prayer and unanimity in community go hand in hand!). Mary of the Gospels was 'corrected' by Jesus twice (Lk 8:21; 11:28) and urged to “listen to the Word of God and put it into practice”. May she who became the mother of God because she listened to the angel's word (Lk 1:38) and remained mother of God because she pondered what happened in her heart though she did not understand (Lk 2:19.33.51), teach us to have the courage to obey Jesus and become our brothers' zealous keepers (cf. Gen 4:9).