A Debt We Could Not Pay

Let he without sin cast the first stone if you will.
To say that my bride isn't worth half the blood that I've spilled.
Point your finger and laugh if you choose
to say my beloved is borrowed and used
She is strong enough to stand in my love.
I can hear her say..

"I am weak.
I am poor,
I'm broken, Lord,
but I'm yours.
Hold me Now.
Hold me Now."

--Jennifer Knapp, "Hold Me Now" from Kansas (1997)

I've been thinking a lot this past week about the woman with the alabaster flask and the Pharisee named Simon (and that was even before Miriam's sermon on Sunday!). I ran across the story again in my own reading the previous week, and it has stuck with me. In a brief Google search I found that there are some that link "Simon the Pharisee" with "Simon the Leper" and try to argue that this anointing and the account of an anointing at the end of Jesus' ministry (by Mary of Bethany, in John's version) are the same event, both occurring in the home of someone named Simon. Although I doubt that is the case historically, there is the argument that Jesus said "wherever this gospel is proclaimed in the whole world, what she has done will also be told in memory of her" (Matt. 26:13), and Luke records no other anointing. It is also fascinating for me as a dramatist to think about the various connections that would arise if the two stories were versions of the same event--just the idea of a Pharisee (upholder of the rules of ritual purity) becoming a leper (one of the people most ostracized by such laws) provides a ton of material to wrestle with dramatically in itself! But I digress...

The point which caught my attention at first was the parable that Jesus told Simon about the two debtors. One owed 500 denarii (a days' wage) and the other owed 50, and both debts were forgiven by the moneylender. Jesus asked which would love the person who forgave their debts more, and Simon answered (correctly, according to Jesus) that the one forgiven more would love more. Jesus then made the connection between the "sinful woman" and the debtor who owed the larger sum, and used that to explain her actions (which the Pharisee thought wildly inappropriate). Simon was left to see himself as unable of experiencing a love of that level, because he'd only been forgiven a little.

NOW, the question is, "Is that true?" Did the upright (uptight) Pharisee just not sin enough? Should he have loosened up, lived it up, and become an extravagant sinner so that God could forgive him much more, and consequently he could love God that much more? Does God weigh our sins in the scales like a moneylender? Were the woman's sins REALLY ten times as much as the Pharisee's?

OF COURSE NOT! ALL sin is abominable in God's sight! Jesus died for the sins of the world, but he wouldn't have had to die any less to fully forgive one person's one sin. Death is death and sin is sin. It's ridiculous to attempt to measure either, let alone compare measurements.

So why did Jesus tell this parable? If sins cannot really be measured, then why tell a story in which God is depicted as a moneylender managing debts and parceling out pardons? Probably because that is the only way Simon could think of God. If one wants to be able to distance oneself from other sinners, if one wants to justify himself in God's sight by saying, "I thank thee, O God, that I am not like other people--they sin TEN TIMES more than I do!" then one has to imagine that God is keeping track of these things with at least as much scrutiny as we are.

BUT, if we would realize the seriousness of our own sin--of each and every "small" sin we do--and of what it cost our God to forgive it, then we could ALL love as lavishly as the woman with the alabaster flask.