The Sánchez Archives TWENTY FOURTH SUNDAY OF ORDINARY TIME Year A

By
Patricia Datchuck Sánchez

Forgive and Be Forgiven

SIRACH 27:30-28:7
ROMANS 14:7-9
MATTHEW 18:21-35

When their ordeal as hostages in Lebanon had come to an end, most of the more than a dozen men, who were held for all or part of eight years (1984-1991 C.E.), committed their experiences to writing. Their books contain accounts of desperate loneliness, brutal torture, incessant interrogations and emotions which ran the gamut from rage to fear, from resentment to hope, from hatred to forgiveness.

One of the hostages, Brian Keenan, recounted “Each of us had to reach inside himself to find that which was necessary to survive.” For Catholic priest, Reverend Lawrence Martin Jenco, captured in 1985, survival included forgiving those who made pain and abuse an integral part of each of his nights and days. In the published report of his experiences (Bound to Forgive, Ave Maria Press, Notre Dame: 1995), Rev. Jenco traced what he called his pilgrimage to reconciliation and forgiveness.

“One day in Rome”, wrote Rev. Jenco, “within days of my release from captivity, a paparazzi shouted at me from a distance, ‘Father Jenco, what are your feelings toward the terrorists who held you?’ I responded without much thought: ‘I’m a Christian. I must forgive them’.” Then he realized the lengthy process which had enabled him to offer this almost glib, automatic response.

Forgiveness had not come easy. How does a person forgive being forcibly abducted, thrown into a car trunk and robbed of five hundred and sixty-four days of life. How does a person forgive being gagged with a dirty rag, wrapped from head to foot with packing tape? How does a person forgive being stripped of clothing and chained to a radiator? How can being kept for six months in dark isolation and deprived of food and water for days at a time be forgiven? How can a person forgive another who deliberately breaks his glasses, leaving him unable to see? How can being kicked and beaten until senseless be forgiven? How can a person forgive another who sprayed toxic chemicals in his mouth to prevent his snoring? How?

But, Rev. Jenco was able to forgive his captors and abusers because he kept, uppermost in his mind and in the depths of his heart the teachings of Jesus. He wrote, in what he called his hostage journal, all the scripture texts he could remember concerning forgiveness. Among these texts were a section of today’s first reading: “Forgive your neighbor’s injustice; then when you pray, your own sins will be forgiven” (Sirach 28:2), and from today’s gospel: “Each of you must forgive his brother from his heart” (Matthew 18:35). As Rev. Jenco noted, “Writing these passages was the easy part, making them incarnate was no easy task.” The fact that he had accomplished this difficult task was evident in the conversation Rev. Jenco had with one of his guards named Sayeed.

It was near the end of his captivity, although Rev. Jenco had no way of knowing that he would soon be released. Sayeed, who had brutalized him many times, had begun to call Rev. Jenco “Abouna”, an Arabic name meaning “dear father.” Sayeed asked if Abouna remembered the first six months of his captivity. Rev. Jenco responded that he did remember all the pain and suffering he and his brother hostages had endured at the hands of Sayeed and the other guards. Then Sayeed asked in a quiet voice, “Abouna, do you forgive me?”

Overwhelmed by this question, the still blindfolded Rev. Jenco recognized Sayeed’s question to be a call from God. Could he let go of his anger and vindictiveness? He realized that he was being challenged to forgive unconditionally, not just one wrong but hundreds of instances of persecution and abuse. He realized that he could not forgive Sayeed on the condition that he change his behavior or conform to other values.

When he, at last found words to respond to Sayeed, Rev. Jenco said, “Sayeed, there were times when I hated you. I was filled with anger and revenge for what you did to me and my brothers. But Jesus said on a mountain top that I was not to hate you. I was to love you. Sayeed, I need to ask God’s forgiveness and yours.”

After forgiving Sayeed, Rev. Jenco felt free and empowered by God’s word. Those same words empower us today. When we make our own the message of this Sunday’s readings, then the challenges to forgive, which are part of our everyday lives can be met.

SIRACH 27:30-28:7

Like any good educator, Jesus ben Sira was a great motivator. Scholars believe that this second century B.C.E. (ca 180) sage had an academy in Jerusalem where he instructed young people from wealthy families. The book attributed to him, called Sirach or Ecclesiasticus, defies any attempt at an orderly outline because it is actually a compilation of class notes accumulated over years of teaching. Sirach’s topics are many and varied, ranging from practical advice regarding table etiquette to more serious instructions concerning prayer, faith and caring for the poor. At the basis of all of Jesus ben Sira’s teaching was a concern to preserve the traditions and heritage of Judaism against the influences of foreign cultures; e.g. Hellenism. His efforts for his fellow Jews were furthered when ben Sira’s grandson translated his work into Greek (ca 130 B.C.E.) in order to make its wisdom accessible to Greek- speaking Jews in the Diaspora.

Today’s first reading includes part of a poem (27:28-28:1) which was set off by the inclusion of “vengeance” in the opening and closing verses. Alexander di Lella (“Sirach” The New Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs: 1990) suggests that the poem referenced Haman’s plot to kill Mordechai and other Jews and points to the results of that treachery (Esther 3:2,5; 5:14). Sin is never without its consequences. Those who are angry and vengeful can be sure that their sin will return to haunt them in the form of divine retribution.

In this excerpt of ben Sira’s teachings, the ancient sage was attempting to educate his students toward a true understanding of the virtue and practice of forgiveness. He counseled that those who rely on divine forgiveness as the remedy for their sin must be aware that this forgiveness is conditioned upon the believers readiness to be forgiving toward others (28:2). Sirach 28:6-7 reflects a form of education common among the Hebrew sages and prophets. Remember... Think... and Learn! By calling their people to give serious consideration to the truth as they set it before them, the prophets and sages hoped to lead their contemporaries in the ways of God.

By way of motivation, ben Sira invited his readers to remember first their own deaths (28:6) and then think of the covenant and its commandments (28:7).

With the finality of death, divine forgiveness becomes most urgent; ben Sira called his readers to set things right while they had time. While fear of death may be an imperfect and negative motivation for doing what is right, the references to the commandments and the covenant called for a more mature and positive response. Those related to God by virtue of the covenant were the blessed recipients of his constant love and mercy. As brothers and sisters, covenanted to the same God, the people of Israel were called to manifest a similar love and mercy toward one another. To do less would have breached the terms of the covenant, viz, the commandments.

Jesus ben Sira seems to have anticipated the teachings of Jesus who taught his disciples to pray for the grace and capacity to be forgiving: “forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.”

ROMANS 14:7-9

Anglican Archbishop Desmond Tutu has been a driving force in promoting peaceful relations among the various political factions in his native South Africa. Aware that forgiveness and mutual respect for the differences of others are necessary to any peaceable union, he once said, “We witness... by being a community of reconciliation, a forgiving community of the forgiven.” Moreover, Archbishop Tutu declared that the community of believers, who are both salt and light for the world, have no other choice but to serve its needs. Said he, “We must transfigure a situation of hate and suspicion, of brokenness and separation, of fear and bitterness. We have no option, We are servant to the God who reigns and cares.”

In chapter fourteen of his letter to the Roman church, Paul acknowledged that there were factions and differences within the community which threatened its unity. Like Archbishop Tutu, Paul reminded his readers that their belonging to God, in both life and death, meant that they should conduct themselves as responsible servants. As such, they were to treat one another with the same quality of love and understanding as they themselves experienced in their relationship with God.

At issue in the Roman community was a dispute concerning the practices of eating (or not eating) certain foods and observing certain days (14:1-6). Some members of the church were scrupulously careful not to eat anything which they considered unclean e.g. meat which had been sacrificed to idols. Others found the issue to be moot and ate as they pleased. Naturally, the freedom of those who ate freely was a scandal to those with more delicate consciences. Paul had addressed this subject earlier, in his correspondence with the Corinthian church (1 Corinthians 8-10).

In his letter to the Romans however, Paul’s comments were more general. Without addressing a specific problem, he wrote in broad terms regarding the need for conservative and liberal elements in the community to resolve the tensions that divided them.

Because all believers, both conservative and liberal, belong to God (“we the Lord’s” vs. 8), that primary affiliation should override and obviate all other differences. “Paul criticizes both the conservatives, who ‘sit in judgment’, and the liberals who ‘look down upon your brother’, in verse 10, and this on the ground that both parties are usurping a role that belongs only to God...” (Paul Wrightman, Paul’s Later Letters, Abba House, New York: 1984).

To continue to bicker over differences is to offer the world the negative witness of a fragmented church. Trivial disagreements sap the strength and mire the true message which believers are to offer, viz. “We are servant to the God who reigns and cares; we are a community of reconciliation, a forgiving community of the forgiven.”

MATTHEW 18:21-35

Peter thought that he had grasped Jesus’ message of magnanimous love when he offered to forgive another who would wrong him seven times. Seven was considered to be the perfect number; it signified fullness. Peter may also have drawn on rabbinic teaching for his suggestion. According to the rabbis, a person was obligated to forgive another three times. Rabbi Jose ben Hanina taught, “He who asks forgiveness from his neighbor should not do so more than three times.” Rabbi Jose ben Jehuda said, “If a person commits one offense, they forgive him; if he commits a second offense, they forgive him; if he offends a third time, they forgive him, but the fourth time, they do not forgive.” As William Barclay (“Matthew”, The Daily Study Bible, The Saint Andrew Press, Edinburgh: 1975) pointed out, this practice may have been taken from the book of Amos wherein there are a series of condemnations of various nation’s which declared: “for three transgressions and for four” (Amos 1:3,6,9,11,13; 2:1,4,6). From these references , it was deduced that God’s forgiveness would cover three offenses but that a fourth offense would meet with retribution. Since, humankind could not exceed God’s graciousness, it was believed that forgiveness was limited to three times.

Peter, however, believed that his relationship with Jesus demanded more; therefore he took the rabbinic limit (three times), doubled it and added one to make seven. But, Peter was to learn that even this was not sufficient for those who would be Jesus’ disciples. Seventy times seven times implied that forgiveness should be limitless! This fact is borne out in the parable which accompanied the challenge to offer forgiveness without end.

In some translations, the “huge amount” (v. 24) which the first official owed the king was specified as ten thousand talents. A talent was the largest monetary unit and ten thousand was the largest number used in numeric calculations. Considering the fact that “the total revenue of the province of Idumaea, Judaea and Samaria was only 600 talents and that the total revenue of even a wealthy province like Galilee was only 300 talents,” this debt represented an incredible amount. (William Barclay, op. cit.) More than incredible, the staggering figure of ten thousand talents signified that the debt was utterly impossible to repay.

Nevertheless, at the official’s request, the king had pity on the official and dismissed the debt outright. Careful readers will remember that this parable was told in order to describe the reign of God (v. 23); its message, therefore, concerns something greater than an enormous monetary debt. Before God, (king and master of all) each person is a sinner; the “debt” due to sin is beyond any human capability to satisfy. Nevertheless, God, in great mercy has forgiven the “debt” of human sin through the saving person and mission of Jesus.

In the second part of the parable, forgiven sinners are instructed as to the manner in which they should treat one another. Compared to ten thousand talents, the debt owed by the fellow servant was a trifling amount. Some translations describe it as one hundred denarii which was approximately one five- hundred- thousandth of ten thousand talents. Rather than be patient and allow his fellow servant time to repay what was a fully manageable debt, the official behaved vengefully. The message for citizens of the kingdom is clear. Those who have been graciously forgiven the unrequitable debt of sin are thereby pressed to conduct themselves with similar graciousness toward others. To do otherwise is to forfeit God’s loving mercy and compassionate forgiveness.

[NOTE TO USERS: This archive is available for use without charge, but it remains the property of the author and under copyright with Celebrations Publications. Users are permitted to print individual Sunday commentaries for pastoral use, but are prohibited from downloading or copying files or printing any portion of this for sale or distribution.]