Peter approached Jesus and asked him,
"Lord, if my brother sins against me,
how often must I forgive?
As many as seven times?"
Jesus answered, "I say to you, not seven times but seventy-seven times.
That is why the kingdom of heaven may be likened to a king
who decided to settle accounts with his servants.
When he began the accounting,
a debtor was brought before him who owed him a huge amount.
Since he had no way of paying it back,
his master ordered him to be sold,
along with his wife, his children, and all his property,
in payment of the debt.
At that, the servant fell down, did him homage, and said,
'Be patient with me, and I will pay you back in full.'
Moved with compassion the master of that servant
let him go and forgave him the loan.
When that servant had left, he found one of his fellow servants
who owed him a much smaller amount.
He seized him and started to choke him, demanding,
'Pay back what you owe.'
Falling to his knees, his fellow servant begged him,
'Be patient with me, and I will pay you back.'
But he refused.
Instead, he had the fellow servant put in prison
until he paid back the debt.
Now when his fellow servants saw what had happened,
they were deeply disturbed, and went to their master
and reported the whole affair.
His master summoned him and said to him, 'You wicked servant!
I forgave you your entire debt because you begged me to.
Should you not have had pity on your fellow servant,
as I had pity on you?'
Then in anger his master handed him over to the torturers
until he should pay back the whole debt.
So will my heavenly Father do to you,
unless each of you forgives your brother from your heart."
So let's analyze.
A King had a Treasury (collected via taxes and various fees) which, he on occasion, loaned out with the expectation of being paid back. This Treasury, being not in circulation, had no economic impact on supply and demand -- and thus on price.
He made such a loan (or, more likely but the Gospel does not say, a series of such loans) but he was imprudent, and in fact the borrower had no capacity to pay.
This loan, being made in the first instance, was highly inflationary; it added to the supply of circulating currency in the realm, which of course shifts the supply and demand curve and thus results in higher prices.
But, if the loan was prudent and could be repaid, when it is paid the curve shifts back in exactly the same amount, so the inflationary impulse is temporary. This is a question of balance and timing, but not ultimate effect.
That person to whom the King made the loan in turn loaned part of what he was loaned to another, and that second person could not pay either. The original King, discovering that he had refused to continue to "pay it forward" and leave the inflationary impact in the economy took out his wrath on the original borrower -- despite the alleged original point of the Gospel (and the First Reading, from Sirach, stating that one must not utilize wrath at all!)
Hypocrisy strike #1; apparently the ban on wrath and anger do not apply to persons in political power.
But the much-larger hypocrisy was found in what Jesus allegedly taught regarding said King in that his "forgiveness" of the loan was no such thing at all. The King, by his actions, forcibly screwed every other person in the kingdom by placing an inflationary impulse into the kingdom's economy in the form of increasing the money supply without any work being done of equivalent value in exchange for it. Further, as King he can re-tax it to refill his Treasury for which he is not required to do any work and if he does he screws the people not once, but twice!
This, allegedly, "Christ commands."
Well, if he really did and this is not an abomination of Christ's teachings by man, then he in fact commanded you to screw not just your neighbor but, if you're in a position of political power, to screw everyone else for the benefit of the favored few, or the one -- specifically said person in power.
The correct response of the people who are under such a "King" is to decapitate him for the deceptive act of screwing each and every one of them by subterfuge and fiat, a punishment assessed upon them without the precedent of a crime.
Of course were Christ to have taught that -- a King who deliberately tampers with the economy to benefit a favored few who he allegedly claimed were "servants" or "patrons" yet in fact got to cheat in the economy compared to everyone else; they got fabulously rich while everyone else got the scraps, should be dragged out of his castle and decapitated in the middle of the town square -- we won't have all the economic problems we have today..... would we?