10 Then he called the crowd to him and said to them, “Listen and understand: 11 it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles.” 12 Then the disciples approached and said to him, “Do you know that the Pharisees took offense when they heard what you said?” 13 He answered, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. And if one blind person guides another, both will fall into a pit.” 15 But Peter said to him, “Explain this parable to us.” 16 Then he said, “Are you also still without understanding? 17 Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach, and goes out into the sewer? 18 But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart, and this is what defiles. 19 For out of the heart come evil intentions, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. 20 These are what defile a person, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile.”
21 Jesus left that place and went away to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22 Just then a Canaanite woman from that region came out and started shouting, “Have mercy on me, Lord, Son of David; my daughter is tormented by a demon.” 23 But he did not answer her at all. And his disciples came and urged him, saying, “Send her away, for she keeps shouting after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.” 26 He answered, “It is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” 28 Then Jesus answered her, “Woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed instantly.
Matthew 15:10-28 (Year A August 14-20) contains sayings on the theme of points of Jewish law (beginning in verse 1 and continuing to verse 20), and an example of Jesus encountering ritual uncleanness outside of the land of Israel. Matthew will subordinate ceremonial law to the law of love.[1]
Introduction
In Matthew 15:1-20 (Mark 7:1-23), the mode of a disputation is the cast of the whole episode like those that took place between Pharisees and Christians after 70 AD. It is an example of polemic, which tends to discredit opponents, and thus, we should not expect a fair presentation of the dispute. However, its form highlights the problem with a casuistic approach to ethics and the moral life. Even if one can view oneself as obeying one part of the law, one can always point out other legislation where one is weak. We best understand the entire reading as Jesus innovating by setting his words and deeds in contrast to certain points of Jewish Law. In doing so, Jesus invites us to consider the mission of the people of God in the world.
Jesus was not going to maintain a rigid adherence to the code, even if that is what faithful Jews of the time did, if it hindered accomplishing the larger purposes of God. He is opening a discussion of right and wrong. Jesus makes it clear that the path to solid, supportive, healthy relationships, self‑respect and a quality life starts with the usually painful decision to do the right thing. One way to think of what it was like to learn from Jesus is that he encouraged a focus upon development of character, courage, and conscience. He saw that the Judaism of his time was not accomplishing the mission God had for it to be a light to the nations. The primary obstacle was its adherence to ritual code in the changed environment of Hellenistic and then Roman occupation. The Jewish people show much enthusiasm for the ritual tradition, their code, so much so that they are no longer cherish the mission God gave to the people of God to be a witness to the nations.
The binding character of Jewish oral traditions must have been a real issue for the first decades of the church. Jesus will expand the issue involved to the way adherence to oral Tradition and Torah establishes a boundary between the people of God and those outside Torah that inhibits their witness. Rejection of kosher rules and other purification rituals takes away the observable outward markers that separate Jews from their Gentile neighbors. It would have been in line with the prophetic tradition for Jesus to insist that ethical life is as important as purity laws. Jesus took the argument a step further, however, challenging the essential nature of kosher as holiness and the ethical. In verse 19, Mark offers an editorial comment: “(Thus he declared all foods clean).” The kosher diet[2] must no longer be a barrier to table fellowship with non-Jews. Mark agrees with Luke (Acts 10:9-16) and Paul (Romans 14) that Jesus and the earliest Christian communities believed in the removal of such obstacles to building community with Gentiles. While the Pharisees and scribes began with a question about following “the tradition of the elders,” there is a deeper question: Will the table be a place where they maintain boundaries? Alternatively, will the table be a place where they will welcome outsiders? His comment about all foods being clean is really an example of taking something from the life of Jesus and applying it in a different context. Although Christianity began within the Jewish community, by the time Mark wrote his gospel, it had expanded well beyond Jews into the Gentile world. The early church had to wrestle with the issue of how much of Jewish practice was to be required of Gentile Christians, and what they produced was “not much” (see Acts 15). In fact, kosher practices sometimes made it difficult for table fellowship to happen in the early church when both Christian Jews and Christian Gentiles were present. Thus, Mark took this story of Jesus’ comments about what defiled a person and “sermonized” on it. His parenthetical remark implied something like: "Even Jesus recognized that keeping kosher without the accompanying holiness of heart was pointless. Therefore, we should not allow differing dietary practices to divide us in the church now.” In this incident, Jesus wasn’t out to “kill” kosher practices, but instead, he identified what is truly kosher. What is truly kosher, as Lev 20:25 makes clear, is to be holy to the Lord, set apart for God’s purposes.
Verse by verse study
Verses 10-11 (Mark 7:14-15) challenges Jewish law of what goes in, defining purity in moral terms. Jesus summons the crowd to him. “Listen and understand: it is not what goes into the mouth that defiles a person, but it is what comes out of the mouth that defiles.” This parable contrasts food and words, where food cannot make a person unclean, but the evil words that one utters defile a person. The point is not the abolition of all the Torah regulations about pure and impure foods (Lev 11, Deut 14:3-21). However, Paul understood it this way (Rom 14:14, I Tim 4:4, Tit 1:15).[3] Part of the concern for ritual cleanliness focused on food, and thus, what went into the mouth could make one clean or unclean. Jesus directly assaults this tradition in a way that assaults a way of life. It would appear to assail kashrut and thus the continuing significance of a crucial element of the Torah and the oral tradition. Such a view explains in part why Jesus could so easily cross boundaries that Torah and its oral tradition had established. In uttering the aphorism that what comes out of the is what defiles, Jesus rejects the laws governing pollution and purity of the Jewish tradition. What defiles people is not what they eat but what they do. Jesus is abrogating the Torah concerning clean and unclean meats. In Lev 11:43-44, we read: “You shall not make yourselves detestable with any creature that swarms; you shall not defile yourselves with them, and so become unclean. For I am the LORD your God; sanctify yourselves therefore, and be holy, for I am holy.” The laws of purity were an essential feature of Israel’s piety. Jesus’ statement, therefore, is a radical notion. However, he responds in the tradition of the prophets that challenges the practice of ritual considering the practice of ethics.
Verses 12-13, unique to Matthew, has the theme of the plant rooted out. It relates an exchange between Jesus and the disciples, in which the disciples inform Jesus that he has given deep religious offense to the Pharisees to the point that it causes denial and rejection of the Jesus and his preaching by his statement regarding ritual cleanliness and purity.[4] His response is simple. In a saying, common lore or a common proverb, he says that Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted, dismissing the threat of the religious authorities. The image, drawn from Jer 1:10, has also been used in 3:7-10, 7:16-20, 12:33-37. Taking a stand as Jesus does inevitably invites the opposition to stand up.
Verse 14 (Luke 6:39) contains secular proverbs from common lore,[5] Jesus warning his followers Let them alone; they are blind guides of the blind. They are blind to the will of God and to the word of Jesus at which they take offense.[6]And if one blind person guides another, both will fall into a pit. The biting and edgy comment refuses to acknowledge the Pharisees as those who see clearly and can lead the spiritually blind. Paul also refers to Jews in the congregation who are sure that they are sure guides for the blind, light to those in darkness, a corrector of the foolish, and a teacher of children (Rom 2:19-20). Such a saying foreshadows the developing and deadly relationship between Jesus and religious leaders.
Verses 15-20 (Mark 7:17-23) has the theme of what comes out and represent an explanation and development of the view of Jesus on ritual purity in verse 11. Peter, spokesperson for the disciples, wants Jesus to explain the parable to them. His response devalues ritual purity and emphasizes internal commitments expressed in human action. Are you also still without understanding? 17 Do you not see that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach, and goes out into the sewer? Jesus points to the purgative role of the alimentary tract. One should be able to see that whatever goes into the mouth enters the stomach and goes out into the sewer. Our bodies will eventually expel the food we eat. The body purges itself of any impurity that might come from food. It will do so naturally. 18 But what comes out of the mouth proceeds from the heart or conscience, and this is what defiles. 19 For out of the heart come evil intentions, which is reflected in disobedience to the moral concerns related to the second table of the Ten Commandments in Ex 20:13-16, murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, slander. 20 These are what defile a person. In want is an addition,[7] But to eat with unwashed hands does not defile. This is how we pollute everything to which we relate. Such a list is like what we find in Romans 1:28-32, where Paul will refer to degrading passions, coveting, envy, murder, strife, deceit, gossips, slanderers, as well as other expressions of wickedness and evil. The moral element of the Ten Commandments remains in play for Jesus, the earliest Christian community, and Paul.[8] We might also think of the list in Colossians 3, where if we are to live authentic lives we will not lie to each other. We will bear the burden of the other. We will practice love and forgive. We are at peace. We live gratefully before God and each other. We might also think of Gal 5:22-23, focusing our lives on love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control. Our words and actions arise from who we are. Jesus shows little interest in how we feel about ourselves. He wants us to develop proper character, conscience, and values, and have the courage to live that way. If the heart can be a cesspool, it can also be the peaceful, flowing stream that encourages the development of virtue, character, and a clear conscience. Followers of Jesus are to focus upon the real wrongs human beings do toward each other and therefore against God. These moral infractions make one impure and unclean; they arise from our hearts. Jesus focuses upon doing the right thing, which is difficult in a culture that is uncertain if truth or falsity exists or if right and wrong exist. Yet, avoiding the question would lead us down a self-destructive path. That life is one that is like -- to God -- a sweet-smelling sacrifice of praise! "For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing" (II Cor 2:15). We live like Christ, and "walk in the way of love, just as Christ loved us and gave himself up for us as a fragrant offering and sacrifice to God" (Eph 2:15).
Matthew 15:21-28 (Mark 7:24-30) is a controversy dialogue between Jesus and a Canaanite woman with a subsidiary account of an exorcism at a distance of her daughter, with significant alterations from Matthew. It is a unitary composition. The main point is the behavior of Jesus as the dialogue progresses. The story is more like a controversy dialogue. The uniqueness of controversy dialogue is that Jesus loses in a way that does not denigrate him, but rather, anticipates the gentile mission of the early church.[9] Peter, then later James, led the Palestinian branch of the early church. Paul, on the other hand, understood the focus of his missionary work on gentiles. Paul was closer to Jesus on this point than Peter or James. Yet, for us to reach this conclusion, we have some difficult sayings of Jesus to consider.
Leaving Galilee, Jesus leads the disciples toward Tyre and Sidon. Food grown in Galilee was disbursed in the markets of Tyre. [10] This visit foreshadows the Gentile mission, being an example of the way Jesus challenged notions of ritual purity. While Jesus wants to avoid crowds, human need finds him. However, before they get to Gentile territory, a Canaanite, a people who had long been enemies of the Jewish people, considered pagan, approaches him while still on Israelite territory. A woman breaks the strict behavioral codes of decency in approaching Jesus because of her need, an act that makes her character questionable. The point is that these exterior matters do not make the encounter unclean, but pollution could arise if zeal for ritual purity led to a failure to do the right thing. She approaches Jesus in a theologically correct way, addressing him as Lord and asking for mercy. She refers to him as Son of David, a title offered by the common folk who were able to see Jesus as the Messiah of Israel. Her request involves an exorcism of a demon tormenting her daughter. In 8:5-13, another gentile, a Roman centurion, requested healing at a distance for his servant, a story that resulted in similar banter between the Jewish rabbi and the gentile in need. Verses 23-25 are unique to Matthew, where Jesus responds with silence, which give the disciples an opportunity to give the advice to Jesus that he send her away, in some translations, but as in 18:27 and 27:15, let her go with her request granted. Jesus says in verse 24 with theological correctness, consistent with 9:36 and 10:6, reflecting the prophetic self-consciousness of Jesus at home within the Jewish-Christian community and its reflection on the Gentile mission,[11] I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel... He affirms the primacy of the covenant of God with Israel, despite a form of disobedience that makes them more like lost sheep. Jesus will not abrogate the promises of God to Israel for the sake of this woman. His concern was not ritual purity. He was open to the non-conforming elements of Israel. He would have had regular contact with Gentiles in Galilee. Jesus did not view himself as forming a remnant in contrast with Israel. His movement was open to Israel as a whole.[12] Biblical tradition ordained that to save all humanity the message must first go to Israel so that the Jews could then witness to the rest of the world. Jesus is not about to abrogate God's promises or redefine his divine mission simply to quiet a single disruptive Canaanite woman. However, she worshipped him and asked the Lord to help her. The woman responds by coming to Jesus again in a theologically appropriate way. She properly kneels before him in reverence, the sign of faithfulness in the Gospel story. She again addresses him with the theologically correct term, Lord. She offers a pathetic plea for help. She is tenacious. She has enough faith that she turns Jesus from his view of his mission. Verse 26-28 returns to Mark. In response to her begging on bended knee for deliverance, not for herself, but for her daughter, the response of Jesus is: It is not right to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs. The vocation of Jesus is to bring salvation to the Jewish people, who are children of God and of the promises of God, before caring for gentiles, who were dogs or puppies in the eyes of the Jewish people. If read the way most readers would seems curt, cold and cutting. I can imagine Jesus wanting to teach a lesson to his disciples. Jews often referred to Gentiles as dogs and themselves as children of God.[13] The statement may well be ironic rather than dismissive. The statement becomes a direct invitation to the woman to engage him in some intellectual banter. Jesus may want to see a response of faith in this woman. Jesus had a smile, as if chiding those in the room to consider whether the woman really is what Jewish attitudes say she is. He looked at his Jewish disciples as he referred to offering food to the children (of Israel) before offering food to (Gentile) dogs. He looked at the woman and said it in a way that made her feel acknowledged as a person. Thus, if Jesus is engaging in teasing banter or sparring, then his comment that she is like a puppy is an invitation to be his sparring partner. He is honoring her with this invitation, for rabbinical sparring is a role explicitly denied to women in that time.She accepts the invitation to engage Jesus in a sparring match. By referring to the dogs getting the crumbs from the table, she acknowledges Jesus to be the giver of the bread of life and declares herself content wit a crumb of wat is really meant for Israel. Jesus will not dismiss her faith.[14] She has humility, faith, trust, confidence, love, persistence, and cheerfulness. Hearing the remark of Jesus, she responds with playfulness and wit, using an ironic sense of humor. We see evidence in the exchanges in the gospels that Jesus had with his contemporaries that he could appreciate such humor. She acknowledges her secondary position in the mission of Jesus, but she has her place as well. Her response impresses Jesus. Her clever use of Jesus' own image demonstrates to him that there is still a way that she might receive a portion of God's bread. The woman is in a lengthy line of biblical examples of those who engage God in a debate. I think of Hannah (I Samuel 1), Abraham (Genesis 18), Jacob (Genesis 32), Moses (Exodus 3-4), Gideon (Judges 6), and the book of Habakkuk, as part of the biblical background for such an interpretation of this exchange. It makes one wonder what would have happened had Noah had the argumentative spirit of this woman and the other biblical cases. Questioning, pushing back, expressing doubt, showing irreverence, and arguing are not out of bounds. We need not fear that we will offend God. God will have the final word, but we may receive insight, inspiration, understanding, and blessing -- or if not those things, at least the comfort that comes from having aired our grievances, even if the answer is not that for which we had hoped. Speaking plainly to God about the things that nag us about God and the will of God is still an act of faith. That she would not only speak out but also cleverly and incautiously talk back to this man Jesus while asking for his help is even more outrageous. If this is the case, then the woman is not beating Jesus in this verbal contest of wits so much as rising to the challenge Jesus has given her. Jesus teasingly insulted her by calling her a dog, and she twisted the reference to place herself among those who would be part of God’s eschatological banquet. Thus, the second quality we see in the woman is humility. She had a humble spirit. Jesus is testing her faith. Jesus is setting up a chance to level the playing field between the Jews and Gentiles, like the way he eliminated clean and unclean food items earlier in this chapter. Either way, the woman responds with a humble spirit, and instead of being defensive, she is contrite. She might be a cultural dog, but she will gladly accept that position if it means receiving the food she seeks. Such humility opens the door for the reception of great gifts and graces. Her humble response meant that grace and honor were on the way.[15] She is persistent and determined, and Jesus respected that in her. Yet, in verse 28, the humor or cleverness of the woman is not what impresses him. O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire. He focuses upon her faith. In 14:31, Jesus remarks about the little faith Peter had. Jesus defines the new qualification for admission to the table -- faithfulness. The faith, trust, and confidence of this woman becomes an example of why external barriers of ritual purity need to be abrogated to accomplish the mission of the people of God to be a light in the world. While religious tradition is valuable, it must not get in the way of doing the right thing in this moment and in this encounter. The story ends by assuring us that her daughter was healed at a distance at this moment.
Application
In the context, the lesson that tradition must be subject to what is right, and that what is "unclean" on the outside is not damaging to the inner person, is played out in the Canaanite woman pericope quite clearly. For Jesus, though called for Israel's sake, to refuse to help this woman in the face of her faithfulness would be wrong. It was an obvious right to extend the grace of God's healing power to this woman and her daughter. The rigid legalism of the Pharisees made them so concerned with what was ritually clean and unclean that they could not smell the stench of their own hypocrisy. In their zeal to do everything "right," they did much that was wrong.
It might be worth our time to look at the woman in this story.[16]
First, the woman succeeded because of her love. She cared for her daughter and was willing to do whatever was necessary to get help.
Second, the woman succeeded because she questioned. This story is a reminder that questioning, pushing back, expressing doubt, showing irreverence and arguing are not out of bounds. We need not fear that we will offend God. God will have the final word, but we may receive insight, inspiration, understanding, and blessing -- or if not those things, at least the comfort that comes from having aired our grievances, even if the answer is not that for which we had hoped. Speaking plainly to God about the things that nag us about God and the will of God is still an act of faith. Why else would we be talking to God at all? Our faith may be thin or weak, but even in an attenuated condition, it is a route to truth. What is more, our faith, weak or strong, becomes a channel through which God can work.
Third, the woman succeeded because of her faith. The Canaanite woman knew of Jesus. Some deep instinct told her that Jesus had the power to save. Jesus then helped her and told her it was because of her faith.
Fourth, the woman succeeded because of her cheerfulness. That is, despite her personal problems, she did not make life miserable for those around her. We all know people who gripe, and complain, and talk about how unfair life is, all because they have not faced problems pretty much like those we all face sooner or later. She looked honestly at her situation, and instead of complaining, she changed her attitude about it. When she heard of Jesus, she saw an opportunity to change her situation. This woman had a seriously ill child. One whom she thought might help, Jesus, was quite harsh with her. She refused to complain.[17] She was able to be pleasant to those around her, to the point of using humor in her response to Jesus, and that is probably why the apostles did not usher her away.
This woman reminds me of the importance of basic courtesy.
"Be known for your courtesy: It alone can make you worthy of praise. Courtesy is the best part of culture, a kind of enchantment, and it wins the good will of all, just as rudeness wins only scorn and universal annoyance. When rudeness comes from pride, it is detestable; when from bad breeding, it is contemptible. Better too much courtesy than too little, or the same sort for everyone, for that would lead to injustice. Treat your enemies with courtesy, and you'll see how valuable it really is. It costs little, but pays a nice dividend: Those who honor are honored. Politeness and a sense of honor have this advantage: We bestow them on others without losing a thing."[18]
Fifth, the woman succeeded because of her persistence. We cannot know whether Jesus would have helped her anyway, but the fact that she persevered in her request must have played a part her. This woman was determined, and Jesus respected that.
[1] Bornkamm, TDNT, VI, 662.
[3]
[4] Stahlin, TDNT, VII, 350.
[5]
[6] Schrage, TDNT, VIII, 292.
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13] A common interpretation of the passage is that “children” refers to the children of Israel and “dogs” being a reference to Gentiles. Interestingly, rabbinic writings contain a tradition of Gentiles as dogs at an eschatological banquet where God would allow them to eat, but not as well as the children of the household.
[14]
[15] Bernard of Clairvaux
[16] Carver McGriff, referring to the outline by William Barclay.
[17] If you don't like something, change it. If you can't change it, change your attitude. Don't complain. --Maya Angelou.
[18] Baltazar Gracian (1601-1658)
No comments:
Post a Comment