Twenty-Third Sunday in Ordinary Time 

Matthew 18:15-20

Translated from a homily by Don Fabio Rosini

A passage that is normally interpreted as dealing with internal relations in the church
This passage is normally viewed as the discourse of Jesus that addresses the question of internal relations in the church. What is at issue here is not a trivial disagreement between two individuals, or a vague grievance that one person might have against another. Here we are dealing with an interpersonal relationship between two people that has been fractured in a serious way; we are talking about a transgression with substance. The correct response to this offence, we are told, is to speak to the offender in person. If he listens to you, then you have won back a brother. If he doesn't want to listen, confront him about his offence in the presence of one or two others. If the issue is still not resolved, then it's time to take more serious steps: raise the issue in front of the Christian community. At this point, if the issue is still not resolved, then treat him as if he were a pagan or publican.

The sole objective of the words of Jesus in this passage - To win back a brother

The entire logic of this passage is dependent on a single term whose importance we must not underestimate. The text speaks of "regaining" a brother, "winning back" a brother that was lost and that must be regained. This brother may have committed a serious offence, but the issue is NOT that an injustice has been done, but that a brother has been lost. If this brother has offended me in such a serious way, then he evidently no longer considers me to be his brother. In response, we are exhorted to talk it out with him - not in order that justice may be done - but that he may be won back. This is the fundamental value at issue in the text.

Following the Lord in seeking out the lost

The passage makes use of a very definite strategy, and that is to prompt a response to the following question: Is there anyone who is listening to these words who would permit himself to lose a brother? Speaking on a personal level, would I permit myself to lose a brother? Would my life be the same following such a loss? Whether he happens to be flesh of my flesh, or a brother that is bound to me in the faith, can I carry on in the same way without him? Are we already in possession of such wealth that we can afford to lose him? Can we let him go without inflicting damage on ourselves? Maybe the real issue is that we can't permit ourselves to appear before the Lord without having all our brothers with us. The Lord Jesus gave his life to gain his brothers, and the same Lord shows us how to win back those who have been lost. The whole point of this discourse is not to discuss some sort of procedure for exacting justice from a brother who has gone astray, but to show us how to win back a brother who has been lost.

Treating someone like a publican is a way of winning him back
 When someone comes to you to criticize something you have done, you understand right away if his criticism is made in love or if he is simply engaging in an act of expressing bitterness. This passage is directed towards the brother who criticizes, and we are all that brother. We shouldn't think that the target of these comments is the one who is criticized. The Gospel is telling us how we should manage our relationships with those who have hurt us; how to behave towards those who have offended us so that we might win them back. And this is what Jesus asks us to do: First, speak with your heart to the one who offends you to win him back. Second, if he doesn't listen, take other people along so that they can say to him: "Look how much he wants to regain you as a brother!" Third, if he still doesn't respond, bring him in front of the whole community and say: "I declare in front of everyone that I want to win you back as a brother. I can't carry on without making peace with you. This rupture that exists between us shouldn't go on, because you and I are brothers". Four, if you can't win him over in these ways, then how will you regain him? By treating him as if he were the pagan or publican.

Treating someone like a publican is not to exclude him, but to love him unconditionally

In order to comprehend the ecclesial practice of excommunication, used only by the Church in grave cases, then we should look to the Pauline texts where such exclusion is therapeutic in objective. Exclusion of such sort is ultimately directed towards regaining a brother, waking up a brother who doesn't realize the gravity of what he is doing. But in the comments of Jesus that we are considering today, something else entirely is at issue. In Matthew's Gospel in general, the pagan and the publican are not people to be excluded, but to be loved. In the same Gospel of Matthew, when Jesus proclaims the Kingdom of Heaven in the Sermon on the Mount, we are told to love our enemies, to do good to those who hate us. In other words, this passage is exhorting us to behave as follows: When you are grievously offended, try to talk to the offender, then try to get someone else to help you to talk to him, then tell him publicly that you have nothing against him, that you want to repair the relationship with him, that you want to win him back. If he still doesn't accept your attempts at repairing the relationship, then, at that point, you have no other option but to love him as he is. Love him, pagan or publican, as he is, offer yourself for him. This is the way it has to be. With some people you can talk to them about Christ, but with others you just have to be Christ. With some people you can enter into fruitful dialogue, with others you just have to love them freely, receiving nothing in return.

Not a three-step procedure for exacting justice from an offender, but a FOUR-step strategy aimed at winning back a brother

How could we ever think that Christ would authorize us to exclude or condemn offenders just because they didn't repent? Jesus died on the cross for those who offended him! And yet we persist in thinking that in this passage Jesus authorizes exclusion? The Church's practice of deciding when someone should or should not be allowed to receive the sacraments is one particular issue. But the forging of fraternal relations is another matter and it must always be our first concern. In summary, this passage is not a three-step legal procedure aimed at settling a quarrel with a brother, and then, when the three steps fail, in the last resort we eject him from our company. No, this is a four-step strategy, each phase of which is aimed at winning back a brother who is already lost. If, after the first three attempts at dialogue, he continues to behave as if I were no longer his brother, I am then called to respond with the ultimate strategy reserved for the pagan and the publican, the ones who are to be loved without condition. I must love them as they are.