Jo Vitale [00:00:35] So welcome to the podcast where we invite you to ask away. Hi everyone, welcome to Ask Away. I'm Jo Vitale and I'm here with Vince. We are delighted that you're able to join us today, whether you're a new listener or you've been listening for a long time. If you're enjoying the podcast, we just invite you leave a review if you have that opportunity because we so appreciate hearing how you're finding it, and what you make of the episode so far. Today is fun because we're recording on the 4th of July and I'm hoping that this is finally the year that I get my corn dog. I've been saying that for as long as we've been living here and for some reason, everyone else in the country seems to be eating them on the fourth of July but I'm always the only one who can ever find one. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:01:18] Jo is fixated on corndogs, so we just need to bite the bullet and have one so you can stop thinking it's more than it is. 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:01:25] I know, I think it's probably going to be awful, but yeah, it's got to be done. It's always interesting on this date-- I feel very at home in the States, we've been living here for so long, but every so often these days come around where there are certain cultural traditions and experiences, but I'm still reminded, oh yeah, I'm not from around here. Fourth of July, perhaps, being the strongest one of those for historical reasons. But it means I'm coming into today's question with some sympathy for the women that we are going to be talking about. Because she too was somebody who was living in a culture that wasn't native to her much more than me, she knew what it felt like to be other. And we're going to be talking today about the Canaanite woman that Jesus encounters in Matthew chapter 15. Now, those of you who've been long-time listeners to Ask Away may remember that we spoke about this passage a number of years ago in response to a question from Gregory. And then a while back another listener called Steve wrote in again asking if we could revisit that question. And so we're actually coming back to it today. 

‍

[00:02:25] Thank you, Steve, for prompting us to do that. We've actually really enjoyed re-engaging with the passage and learning more about the context and purpose of this interaction. It's always fun with the Bible that you think you've studied something in depth, and then when you come back around, you realize there's still more to learn here. And so I'm going to read Gregory's original question for you now, and then we'll get into it. "For quite some time now, I've been developing a workshop that focuses on improving race relations within the church. As the workshop primarily focuses on scriptures in the Bible that deal with how God wants us to think about and respond to racism, classism, and sexism, among other things, there is one passage that continues to perplex me as I study these topics. In Matthew 15 verses 21 to 28, the story of the Syrophoenician woman, even though Jesus compliments her amazing faith, at face value, it can appear as if he also makes an insulting and racial slur when referring to his own people, Israel, as children, and the women's people as dogs." Gregory, thank you again for that question. We're going to jump right into it now. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:03:31] Yeah, thank you so much, Steve and Gregory. Believe it or not, this is actually one of my favorite passages in the entire Bible, which is probably not your obvious choice, but I think it's an amazing example of how we need to dive in rather than shy away when we encounter hard passages. You've heard us say it many times on this show, a little scripture estranges a person from God, but a lot of scripture, letting scripture dwell within you richly, that will bring you into deep intimacy with God. So first, let's read the passage that Steve and Gregory are referencing. The story appears in both Mark 7 and Matthew 15. We'll reference both in this episode, but I'll read now from Matthew 15, starting in verse 21. "And Jesus went away from there and withdrew to the district of Tire in Sidon. And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and was crying, 'Have mercy on me, O Lord, son of David, my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon.' But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, 'Send her away, for she is crying out after us.' He answered, 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.' But she came and knelt before him, saying, 'Lord, help me.' And he answered, 'It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs.' She said, 'Yes, Lord. Yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master's table.' Then Jesus answered her, 'Woman, great is your faith. Be it done for you as you desire.' And her daughter was healed instantly.". 

‍

[00:05:11] We can see why Steve and Gregory are concerned. Matthew describes this woman as a Canaanite. So she would have already been concerned about the expected cultural prejudice against her as she vulnerably approached Jesus, a Jewish leader. Then he seems to give her the silent treatment when she cries out to him. Then he tells her he was only sent for the Jews, not for her, and then he seems to call her a dog. I mean, if we weren't aware of how the rest of this passage plays out, we would imagine that the woman would have been absolutely devastated. And if this were happening today, and imagine if you were present and saw an interaction like this, everyone would have captured it on their phones and social media would have just immediately erupted into a frenzy of accusations of bigotry and racism. So, is this actually what's going on here? Is this the proof text that finally shows that Jesus isn't as great as Christians say he is? That in the end, he's not perfectly divine, but just yet another finite, fallible person who's going to let us down, caught up like everybody else in the abusive prejudices of his day? Is that what's going on here? What do you think, Jo? Sort it out for us. 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:06:21] You can feel the weight of the objection. I mean it's glaringly obvious when we read the passage. And I think part of the reason is that it just stands out like a sore thumb. This text, it registers for us so deeply because it seems so different from everything else. And that to me is important because what that tells me is that actually the reason that this feels so glaring is because it's different from everything else that we're seeing. And so taking it back a notch, the overall biblical context, it just speaks strongly against this kind of this passage. So going with the principle of letting scripture interpret scripture, there are a number of reasons why I actually don't think that this surface interpretation, this immediate knee-jerk reaction actually makes sense of what's really going on in this story. Firstly, because Jesus's own genealogy includes two Canaanite women. Rahab and Ruth, that's laid out very clearly in Matthew chapter one. This is the same gospel that we're talking about. And Matthew himself goes out of his way to put the genealogy first and to highlight those very points. Women often aren't even included in genealogies, but he makes the point to make sure that they're in there, these two Canaanites women. 

‍

[00:07:33] So, it's actually a really tough sell in light of that emphasis we see at the beginning of the gospel to then say that Jesus would have been prejudiced against Canaanite women. Secondly, earlier in that same gospel, Matthew chapter 8, a Roman centurion approaches Jesus pleading for him to heal his own paralyzed servant in this kind of paralleling sort of passage really. And Jesus response quickly, 'I will come and heal him.' And then he goes on to say about the Roman centurion, 'I have not found such great faith, not even in Israel.' So clearly, Jesus is already wanting to communicate that faith is not only for the Jews. He's already healed somebody who was not of the house of Israel. And so it doesn't make sense to say that he's doing so begrudgingly with the Canaanite women or that she needs to somehow convince him or persuade him of it when he's already made the point very clearly in that same gospel that that's exactly what he's going to do, and that he'll honor the person who comes to him with that kind of faith. And then thirdly, Jesus had two options in terms of the word that he used to express this concept that we hear in the passage when he calls her dog. Like the first was Kuon, which carried these derogatory connotations of uncleanness. And Jesus could have used that word with particularly harsh undertones, but instead he uses Kunarion, which was often used affectionately of household pets, as often translated little dog. 

‍

[00:08:53] Now, if Jesus' intention was simply to be insulting towards a woman of a different ethnicity, then why not use the more common term with the more obviously negative connotations? Like, if you're trying to insult somebody by comparing them to a dog, don't downplay it by calling them a little puppy. So I think there might be something else going on here than some intended major slight. Fourthly, in Matthew chapter 15, literally one line before this passage occurs, Jesus is talking about how what comes out of a person's mouth comes from the heart and is what defiles a person. And then he explicitly condemns slander. He says, 'For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, slander.' So it just doesn't make any sense that Matthew would then follow up that very teaching of Jesus by having him blatantly contradict himself by going on to slander somebody. Like it's the most jarring juxtaposition if that's actually what's happening here. And then fifth, immediately after this passage, we read that Jesus was near the Sea of Galilee and that great crowds came to him, bringing with them the lame, the blind, the crippled, the mute, and many others, and they put them at his feet and he healed them. 

‍

[00:10:07] Now, both Jews and Gentiles lived in Galilee during the time of Jesus, and if great crowds were coming to him, the most natural reading would have been that that would have included non-Jews, and that he was eager to heal them too, without them passing some sort of litmus test about whether or not they are of the house of Israel or not. And so in context, Jesus' posture doesn't appear to be one where he's reluctant to heal those who aren't Israelites. And then sixth, there's no hint in the text that this Canaanite woman feels as if she has been insulted and sinned against. Quite to the contrary, she immediately agrees with Jesus saying, yes, Lord. And then remember that in this context, it actually violated Jewish religious tradition for a woman, especially a Gentile woman, to even approach Jesus as a Jewish teacher and make a request of him. And this woman's daughter, she's just deathly ill. And so she would have been entering into this interaction in this very emotionally fragile place for a number of reasons. And so I doubt she would have responded so positively had Jesus taken her suffering as this opportunity to insult her and her child. I know how protective I am of the way people treat and talk about our children. Vince is even worse, because Italian-American. So all of these different things, they just build up this picture that when you look at everything else going on before and in the life of Jesus and things we said, the things he's done, it just doesn't make sense to read it as if suddenly out of nowhere he's being incredibly offensive and insulting. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:11:33] Okay. Wow! Did you get all that? Hope you're taking notes there. That was really helpful. So if that is not what's going on here, if Jesus is not demeaning this woman, well, then what is going on? And again, let's just look carefully at the context. As the interaction begins in verse 21, we read, "And Jesus went away from there and withdrew to the district of Tire in Sidon, and behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and was crying." That word behold is really important. And it's surprising to me actually some translations don't even include it. They don't they don't translate it. It's an exclamatory particle, so you can sort of include it or not, but it's really significant. Whenever we see behold in scripture, it's drawing attention to things that are Particularly prophetic or from God. Just think about where else Matthew uses it in his gospel. Behold, the virgin will conceive and give birth to a son. Behold, a voice from heaven said, 'This is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.' Behold your king comes to you, humble and riding on a donkey. These are significant gospel moments. Behold signifies that this passage is a big deal. And behold also commonly marks transition or fulfillment in a text. 

‍

[00:12:57] Certain themes are raised and then we say behold. In other words, now look and see what I have been talking about. And I think that's what's going on here in Matthew 15. Matthew is alerting us to the fact that what he's about to share is highlighting or fulfilling what comes before it. So what do we find leading up to this passage? Well, Matthew 15 begins with the Pharisees challenging Jesus. Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don't wash their hands before they eat. We get a little more context about this in Mark 7 where it says ‘The Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they give their hands a ceremonial washing holding to the tradition of the elders.' When they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash and they observe many other traditions such as the washing of cups pitchers and kettles. Jesus then responds to the Pharisee's strongly, 'You nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition you Hypocrites. Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you.' And similarly in Mark 7, 'You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions.' I mean, Jesus is not pulling any punches here. Next, Jesus calls the crowd to him and says, 'Listen and understand. Nothing outside a person can defile them by going into them. Rather, it is what comes out of a person that defiles them.' That's in Mark. 

‍

[00:14:29] And then Matthew connects this comment specifically with the eating of food and with speech. What goes into someone's mouth does not defile them, but what comes of their mouth, that is what defiles then. So at this point in the interaction, what would the disciples be thinking? I think they'd be feeling pretty good about themselves to be honest. I I think they'd been thinking we know better than the Pharisees. We don't get caught up like they do in human traditions about purity and impurity that nullify the word of God. No, we know better. We know better than those legalistic and prideful Pharisees. We know we cannot be defiled by what comes into us from the outside. And then the disciples come to Jesus and say, 'Jesus, do you know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this?' It's the most hysterical question to me. Jesus has just said, 'You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions.' The disciples are saying, 'Are you aware of the fact that that offended the Pharisee?' It seems pretty obvious to me? But there's also significance here because the disciples are calling into question whether Jesus is intentional with his own words and whether he understands the impact that they have on other people. Jesus has just said that we are defiled by what comes out of our mouths, and the disciples are questioning whether Jesus is the pot calling the kettle black. Whether he actually understands his own teaching. 

‍

[00:16:11] So then, in response to their concern about the Pharisees being offended, Jesus tells him a parable. He says, 'Every plant that my Heavenly Father has not planted will be pulled up by the roots. Leave them. They are blind guides. If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit.' Peter says, 'Explain that parable to us.' And then Jesus says, 'Are you still so dull?' I mean, this is a comedy sketch going on here at the moment. So they're still confused. They are not getting it. And then Jesus again connects this with what comes out of our mouths. And as Jo has said, specifically with slander. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murder, adultery, sexual immorality, theft, false testimony, and slander. So if I could just summarize the overall context that leads into this passage about the Canaanite woman, the disciples are in danger of setting themselves up as judges over both the Pharisees and Jesus. The Pharisees just don't get it like us. They are caught up in human traditions about purity and defilement that nullify the word of God, but we know better. And yet at the same time, the disciples are also caught up in concern about the Pharisees being offended and Jesus not realizing the impact of His own words. Do you know that the Pharisee's were offended? 

‍

[00:17:40] And through all of this, Jesus is trying to teach the disciples how to think about what we say and what we hear by making a distinction between what comes into us from the outside versus what comes out of our hearts from within. But the disciples clearly are not understanding. They are dull and confused and they need some further teaching on the matter. And then into that context we get behold, and the Syro-Phoenician woman makes her entrance. So what should we expect to come next? If we hadn't yet read beyond that point, if we hadn't yet read the passage about the Canaanite woman, but we understood the context heading into it, what would we expect Matthew to highlight next? I think we would expect that Jesus is going to interact with this woman in such a way that teaches the disciples specifically on these themes of human traditions, offense, what is clean and unclean, and specifically the difference between what comes in from outside and what overflows from our hearts and comes out of our mouths in our speech. 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:18:52] Unsurprisingly, that is exactly what we are soon going to find. But first, we just want to highlight one more thing. A while back, we saw this video that was advertising the hardest job in the world. And the narrator says it's not just a job; it's really the most important job. The title we have going right now is Director of Operations, but it's pretty so much more than that. Responsibilities and requirements are extensive. First requirement is mobility. Requires you must be able to work standing up most or really all of the time. Constantly on your feet, constantly bending over, constantly exerting yourself a high level of stamina. 135 hours per week to really unlimited hours a week. It's basically 24 hours a day, seven days a week, and there are no breaks available. You can have lunch, but only once the associate is done eating their lunch. You must be able to wear several hats. The associate needs constant attention. Sometimes you have to stay up with an associate throughout the night, no vacations. In fact, Thanksgiving, Christmas, New Year's, and holidays, the workload is going to go up and we demand that with a happy disposition. 

‍

[00:19:50] The applicant then looks concerned and says, well, when would there be time to sleep? No time to asleep. 365 days a year? Yes. But the meaningful connections that you make and the feelings that you get from really helping your associate are immeasurable. And also let's cover the salary. The position is going to pay absolutely nothing. Nothing? Yes, nothing. Pro bono, completely for free. And then the narrator says, 'What if I told you that there is someone who actually currently holds this position; billions of people actually? Well, who? And if you can't get this right, then I don't even know what to say to you, but it's moms. Obviously, it's moms. Any mom is yelling right now being like, 'Yep, I know that job so well. I know it inside out. Yeah, I absolutely relate to that feeling.' But here's the point I want to highlight. The reason this video was so powerful, it's because you think the interviewer is saying one thing and being particularly harsh when they're describing this job role. And then right at the end, he reveals that the entire conversation is actually saying in certain respects, the exact opposite of what you thought he was saying. You're thinking, that's insane. Nobody would want that job. And then your thinking is completely overturned. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:21:00] Sometimes I think that, right? 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:21:04] The words are so much more powerful because you're made to think the dialog is headed somewhere else. You think you're on one side of the conversation and the right side, and then all of a sudden you suddenly realize you're completely wrong. It just flips the script on you. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:21:17] Okay, so now let's look at our passage again with that rhetorical device in mind, okay? "And behold, a Canaanite woman from that region came out and was crying, 'Have mercy on me, O Lord, son of David, my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon.'" But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, "Send her away for she is crying out after us." Jesus answered, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Now, is that true? 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:21:55] No. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:21:56] That Jesus was only sent to the house of Israel? No. Is that what Jesus believes? 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:22:01] No. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:22:01] No, clearly not. The whole point of the gospel is that he doesn't believe that and he's opening up the message of God to all people. So why would he then say it? Well, who did believe that? Who did believe the gospel was only for Israel and was in hearing distance? Well, based on the passage, the disciples were the ones who believed that. They were the one who were begging him, 'Send her away.' They didn't think that she was valuable enough to receive God's grace, but she came and knelt before Jesus saying, 'Lord, help me.' And he answered, 'It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the little dogs.' And at this point, you can imagine the disciples both being annoyed at the woman's cries, and perhaps also thinking, well, here goes Jesus again, being offensive, yet again, not understanding the impact of his words. But in this case, unlike with the Pharisees, they're not really bothered. They don't really care if she gets offended because she doesn't have value and they just want Jesus to get rid of her. So here's what I believe is going on here. When Jesus says, 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,' I believe Jesus has scare quotes around that line. Because the disciples are listening and they are, with respect to that line, the primary audience. And we actually have another textual clue about that because who is Jesus speaking to? 

‍

[00:23:33] The text says that after the woman approached and spoke to Jesus, it says, he did not answer her a word. We read that and we clue in on the tone of, well, he didn't answer her a word? I think the text is saying, but he did not answer her a word. In other words, who is he speaking to primarily at this point? And his disciples came and said, 'Send her away for she is crying out after us.' And then it says he does answer. So who is the primarily speaking to? At the beginning, not just this woman, but he doesn't answer her a word, but he responds to the disciples. 'I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.' And so, just like in the hardest job ever video that Jo was referencing, at this point the disciples think one thing is happening and they are affirming the surface level interpretation of what they're hearing. They're thinking, that's right, the gospel is only for the lost sheep of Israel. That's why we were right to be worried about that the Pharisees might be offended. That's also why we are right, we were justified in having no care or concern for how offended a desperate mother with a dying child might be by being denied help and called a dog, because after all she's just a foreigner and not part of the promise of God. We have it right, and Jesus is affirming us. That's what they're thinking. 

‍

[00:24:57] And then, when Jesus continues, 'It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs.' well, again, is that true? No, it's not. Is that what Jesus believes? No, clearly not. Because he's just about to give her what she's asked for, so obviously he doesn't think it's wrong to do so. So again, if Jesus doesn't believe what he is saying, why would he say it? Well, who might have been saying lines like this as they traveled around sharing the gospel? The disciples. We know from other literature of the time that it was quite common for first century Jews to call Gentiles dogs, and speech like that would have been completely consistent with how the disciples are currently treating her, like a dog to be shooed away. So without them initially realizing it, Jesus is impersonating the disciples. He's speaking their words, not his, and this can be a very effective and powerful rhetorical device. I think of when my kids are trying to do something and I adopt the voice of someone who doesn't think they can do it. No. No way. Too hard for you. You can't throw a ball. JJ, you cannot throw a ball that far. Not a chance. And all the while, me knowing that they can do it. And I'm saying it in such a way that if they're listening well, they even know that, that daddy believes in them and I'm actually eager to see them succeed or. 

‍

[00:26:29] Or I think of when my former boxing coaches would impersonate the voice of detractors during training. No, he can't win this bout. No, he's too tired. He's not tough enough. He hasn't trained hard enough. He's ready to give up. There's no way he can go another round. And nothing would motivate me more to go another around than hearing those words. I knew by the coach's tone that he wasn't actually speaking his own thoughts, but what others will think or say, he was speaking their criticisms as a way of motivating me to prove them wrong. Or similarly, what about in literature? I think of the first time I read Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal, where he brilliantly adopts the voice of the callous bureaucratic reasoning of people unconcerned with those starving from famine in Ireland, and then only when his seemingly sound but unethical reasoning leads to horrendous conclusions does the reader suddenly realize that the author doesn't believe what he's been saying at all, but rather has been those of us who do. 

‍

[00:27:30] And then final example, real life example for me. I was in high school. My younger brother, three years younger than me. I was a senior; he was a freshman. I learned that some kids were making fun of him. And I went up to them at lunchtime and I kind of pointed over to my brother and I said, "You know that kid over there?" And they said, "Oh yeah." And then I began to speak out their words that I had heard as if I were the one saying them until they were strongly affirming my words, making fun of my brother and laughing about them. And then I stopped smiling and I said, "That's my brother." That was the end of the conversation, and that was the ending of the bullying. This is what Jesus is doing in Matthew 15. You know that dog of a woman over there? That foreigner? That annoying mother who won't stop bothering us with her ugly crying? Yep, well, that's my child. You've had it all wrong. I have come for her, and I never want to hear another demeaning word about her again. 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:28:38] What's so cool here is that actually this woman, when you see the way the scene continues, she's actually an active participant in it. She has actually picked up on what Jesus is doing before the disciples have. Somehow, He's clued her in, in the way that He's interacting or engaging with her, to such a degree that actually she can see what's happening, even while they're still completely clueless. Because after all, Jesus wouldn't be lying to her. He's not a liar. So if he says these false sentences, things he actually doesn't believe, it can only be because he knows that she knows it's false. And what he's saying is not really what's on the surface, but it's intended to communicate something going on that is a lot deeper. The New Testament scholar F.F. Bruce puts it this way when he says, "What if there was a twinkle in Jesus' eye as he spoke?" I think there was something going on whether it was the eye contact they had or the tone they had or the way he engaged with her, where she got it. She's picked up on the cues even while the disciples are still missing it. And we know this to be true because we get this beautiful textual clue. 

‍

[00:29:41] When Jesus makes this comment about the little dog, she is the one who is like the foil to his part in this scene where she says, "Yes, Lord, but even the little dogs eat the little crumbs that fall from their master's table." She's actually noticing that Jesus doesn't use the harsh word for dogs that he could have used, but instead he's using the diminutive, affectionate word for like a puppy or a little dog. And then she mirrors him by using this diminutive word for a crumb that could mean like a tiny morsel. And so when you see the way they've kind of paired up in this scene, it's like they're the only ones who are cued in as if this whole interaction between Jesus and the Canaanite women, it kind of has this theatrical element to it. Together, Jesus and this woman, they're acting out this prophetic teaching to the disciples. He's spoken the false lines that represent what is in the disciples' hearts and what has been coming out of their mouths. And then she is given the privilege of correcting them with the truth. The bride of the Lord is not only for Israel, but it's for people like her as well. And then Jesus puts this emphatic stamp of approval on what she has said when he proclaims at the end, "Woman, great is your faith." You get it, you get me, you understand. The disciples have not understood, but she sees and she knows what's happening. And he says, "Be it done for you as you desire." And then we're told that her daughter was healed instantly. 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:30:59] Yeah, it's so beautiful and she must have been a woman of such character too, because it's just hitting me that she was in a point of grief. She was desperate and her child was suffering and still somehow she had this wisdom to understand what Jesus was doing and to enter into it really for the benefit of the disciples, even when she was in this desperate place. What discernment she must have had, but also how tenderly and graciously Jesus must have interacted with her that she could see that twinkle in his eyes even amidst such grief that she was going through. So let's not miss how radical this whole passage is. Jesus puts himself in the position of being taught and even corrected by a foreign woman, right? I mean, that's just so countercultural. She uses Jesus' own words even against him to challenge his point in the conversation. Now, of course, Jesus is not actually being rebuked by her because he's putting other's words into his mouth as he and this woman act out this theatrical dialog. But he is symbolically placing her in the position of teacher over him to elevate her value and her faith in front of the disciples. I just marvel at the humility of Jesus here. Jesus's words didn't get through to the disciples. He's tried twice already to teach them on these points in Matthew 15, and both times they don't get it. So what does he do? He enlists the help of a foreign woman to speak on his behalf. We see so much of the heart of Christ in this passage. 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:32:38] And what's so awesome about it is that through this incredible interaction, in just a few sentences, Jesus then actually has taught the disciples on every theme that they've been lacking understanding about earlier in the chapter. The disciples thought the Pharisees are caught up in human traditions about purity and defilement that nullify the word of God, but we know better. But Jesus is saying, be careful when you point your fingers, because you're the ones who are excluding this woman based on human traditions contrary to the will of God. You're doing exactly what you accuse them of. And then the disciples think that they're being defiled by this woman from outside. If she's crying out after us, her annoying cries keep entering our ears and they're defiling us from the outside. So Jesus won't you just send her away so she stops disrupting us from important spiritual things? 

‍

[00:33:24] And then Jesus says to the disciples that actually it's the disciples, not just the Pharisees, who are the ones who are obsessed with being defile from the outside without realizing that it's the words that spring up from their hearts within, those very words that call this woman a dog and try to discard her, that is what is defiling them. And then the disciples, they were worried about the Pharisees being offended, but not about the Canaanite women being offended when they should have had the opposite concern. They should have been concerned not primarily for those in a position of power, but for the vulnerable. They've been worried about offending the plants that God didn't plant and have the audacity to question whether Jesus is aware of who he's offending. And then Jesus says, yes, I know exactly who I'm offending and who I am not offending. But do you? 

‍

Vince Vitale [00:34:09] And then even the poetic beauty to connect all of this back to the metaphor of food. We have this symmetry in this chapter, Matthew 15, which starts with the disciples enjoying their newfound freedom in Christ to eat the food of the market with unclean hands. But at the same time, they're saying that this woman is too unclean to eat what Jesus is offering. The disciples want to enjoy the food at the market from outsiders, but they don't outsiders to enjoy their food, the true food of Jesus. And Jesus is using Eucharistic imagery here to foreshadow what's to come. "It is not right to take the children's bread and give it to the dogs." And she replies, "Even the little dogs eat the little crumbs that fall from their master's table." Where else in the Gospel of Matthew do we find reference to a table and to bread? Matthew 26, "While they were eating, Jesus took bread and when he had given thanks, he broke it and he gave it to his disciples, saying, 'Take and eat, this is my body.'" And what is another name for a broken piece of bread? A little crumb. When Jesus said these words at the Last Supper, the disciples would have reflected back on this beautiful interaction with a Canaanite woman who in her amazing faith understood things of God's heart that they were still learning. Even then, this woman was being invited by Jesus to eat his bread, his body, Jews and Gentiles together with him at the Lord's table. 

‍

Jo Vitale [00:35:48] Yeah, I find this so moving because it tracks with the overall testimony and the picture that we see throughout the Gospels. Often, one of our complaints today is, well, how can we worship God or how could I become a Christian when I hear all these rumors about the way that God treats the outsider or this person or that people group. But when you look at, for example, the encounters that Jesus has with women would be just one example that time and time again what we see of the women who encountered Jesus in his lifetime is that far from running from him, they are always running to him. They are pursuing him. They want to be around him. He is the one person with whom they're made to feel safe. They understood something about Jesus Christ, that there was this invitation there for them, as there is for every single one of us. You can think of Colossians 3 verse 11, "Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all and is in all." 

‍

[00:36:45] And so coming back to Gregory's initial question, one thing that's so cool about this passage is actually that it is a model for all of us about how to approach Scripture and how to approach Jesus Christ. Because often it's passages like this that have people walking away from the Bible. People read it and they say God's way is too challenging or Jesus' words are too hard for us to understand. Or we presume that we do understand, but we're outraged and offended by it like the Pharisees or like the disciples. So we harden our hearts and we walk away. And sometimes we can even use this woman's story as an excuse to do just that. We think we're standing in solidarity with her and we say, "Look at how he treated her. I'm taking offense on her behalf. How can I possibly stay?" And yet the irony, of course, with that is, well, how does she respond? If you want to be in solidarity with this woman, look at her response. Who knows better than what was going on in that moment or how it ought to be responded to than the woman who is standing in front of Jesus' face, looking into his eyes, having this interaction with him and participating in the encounter. 

‍

[00:37:52] And what is her response like? Well, Jesus praises her for it because he calls out and he says, "You're full of faith." Because rather than walking away with misunderstanding and offense in her heart, as we so often do today, she had the faith and the humility to lean in, in that moment, to look more deeply into Jesus' eyes, to actively enter into the conversation that He's inviting her into, and through conversing together to come to this place of understanding the depth and the beauty of Jesus Christ's words and His invitation. And in doing so, she gets to receive and experience the healing and the hope of God who invites every one of us to His table. And so that is the question I think for us just to be dwelling on it and thinking through as we finish up the podcast today. What will our response be like? Will we take offence and walk away or will we look to passages like this and look to this woman and follow the tremendous example of her great faith?

‍