The scene we just heard from the Gospel of Matthew is the centerpiece of the stories of the formation of the community around Jesus.    It’s a short passage that is often cited as the scriptural warrant for the authority of the Bishop of Rome (known to some as the pope).  It is also cited as the scriptural warrant for admitting some and excluding others into the church or into a comfy life after death called heaven; and as the scriptural warrant for forgiving or not forgiving sins.  It is the point where Jesus promises to give authority to Simon and calls him Peter – Rock.  Simon Peter who is nearly always pictured in art as holding the keys – Simon Peter as the rock-solid foundation of the group that Jesus hopes will bring God’s reign to earth.  Never mind that in the next five verses, Jesus tells Simon Peter to get out of his way, referring to him as Satan and as a stumbling block – the weight around God’s ankles that prevents God’s reality from being experienced on earth.  Simon son of Jonah was the rock and the stumbling block.

      This short passage is so layered and packed with weighty theological matters that it reminds me of how I jam my belongings into a suitcase small enough to keep it away from baggage handlers whenever I fly on a plane!  But I digress.  

      The part of the reading this week that made me stop and say, “what does that mean again?” is the part about keys and binding and loosing.  So I read a very interesting article by a Professor of New Testament at Trinity Lutheran Seminary1 that sent me down a research path looking at pictures of locks and keys from 4000 years ago in Egypt, from 3000 years ago in Persia, and 2000 years ago in Palestine.  I spent a considerable amount of time reading about ancient Jewish practices of interpreting scripture, a process referred to as “the key of David.”  And I’m here to report on my findings!

      Jesus says to Simon, “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”  I want to focus on this because I think that this passage is a key (pun intended) to using scripture to figure out what is right and what is wrong – which is something that people in the Church are always trying to do.  In Biblical tradition, the key of David refers to the authority of the teachers of the Law.   Later in Matthew, (23:13) Jesus addresses a woe to some of the religious leaders, charging, “you shut the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither enteryourselves, nor allow those who would enter to go in”2  That sounds like a charge that still applies today doesn’t it?

      The terms that get translated “bind” and “loose” refer to what religious authorities in Jesus’ time did with The Law – that is Torah, or Holy Scripture.  It was an exercise in figuring out how to apply a law – under what circumstances it must be applied (that is, bound) and under what circumstances it did not apply (that is, loosed).  We still use the same ideas when we talk about what obligations or terms are binding, or what rules or agreements are loose.

      For example, in ancient Israel, if a baby dove was found by the side of the road and someone picked it up and took it home, was that a violation against the religious law against stealing?  Well, yes, if it was within 50 cubits of a dovecote, then the dove belonged to the owner of the dovecote.  The finder’s obligation to return the baby dove was binding.  But if the baby dove was found further than 50 cubits away from any dovecote, then no, it was not stealing.  The finder was permitted to keep the dove – the moral requirement did not apply – it was loosed.

     Or here’s a more contemporary example.  When my daughter Sarah found $100 bill on campus at the Episcopal Divinity School, it seemed morally right for her to make an effort to find the owner and return the money (which she did).  But when she found a $50 bill in the doorway of a very crowded club in Boston, she seemed justified in not making an effort to find the owner.  That seemed more like an issue of luck (good or bad depending on which side of the $50 one was on) than of moral principle.

      In progressive religious circles we tend to talk about what is loosed or permitted more often than we talk about what is bound or required in terms of scripture – but in the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus does just the opposite.  Yes, he does loose the injunction against healing or plucking grain to eat on the Sabbath; but he binds laws against adultery to people who have been legally divorced, and he binds the law requiring loving one’s neighbor to complete strangers and even enemies.    It is in Matthew’s Gospel that Jesus explains that he came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it.  That’s important – when Jesus is binding or loosing, he’s not saying that the scriptural law is insufficient or outdated or wrong – he’s saying that it applies or does not apply to particular situations.

      It turns out that there’s a pattern that emerges when one looks at all the times that Jesus binds laws versus the times when Jesus looses laws – and it won’t surprise you.  When addressing people with wealth and privilege, Jesus tends to bind scriptural laws.  When addressing those who are hungry, thirsty, sick, in prison, or in any way impoverished, Jesus tends to loose scriptural laws.  Jesus also publicly criticizes other religious people for placing heavy burdens that are difficult to bear on the shoulders of those who are poor, and for not lifting a finger to help those who were burdened (Matthew 23:4).

      In light of that, think about being given keys if you are someone who does not have access to shelter, to food, to property, much less to anything heavenly.  That’s Simon Peter in this story.  Simon Peter has left everything behind to be with the one who has no-where to lay his head.  Here Jesus is conveying access to him in the form of keys that signify power -- power to open gates that are otherwise closed to him and to others.  Jesus is saying that what Simon Peter binds and looses on earth will have God’s approval.  Jesus is saying that Simon Peter knows right from wrong.  Jesus is telling Simon Peter, that he is solid, that he has the power to open the doors to God’s realm on earth – that he has the access and the power that has been heretofore held exclusively by people with wealth and privilege and the people who work for them.  I love the fact that this story describes keys – plural – not singular.  There is more than one – which means that there is more than one entrance to the realm of God.

      Twentieth century Episcopal Church educator, Charles Penniman, contended that religion is about becoming interpreters of our daily experience rather than about believing.3  So I wonder --  How might this story help us in becoming better interpreters of our daily experience?  How do you know this story within you?  For example, what part of you, like Simon Peter, is not so powerful or privileged as the other parts of you?  What part is dispossessed, lacking access, enthusiastic but unsteady and maybe even afraid in your relationship with the divine?   Imagine that part holding the keys to open the gates to other parts which don’t have much experience of the love of God.  Imagine the Simon Peter parts of this parish holding the keys to open wide the doors to God’s dream of healing and freeing and feeding all who are ailing and in prison and hungry.

      You know Simon Peter got some keys, but he didn’t get all of the keys.  My hunch is that Jesus knew that in terms of access to the Divine, each one of us holds keys that are needed by others to interpret scripture and to open the way for all on earth to experience the love of God – that is, on earth as it is in heaven.  Each one of us holds keys.  So let’s use them.