ACC ~ Matthew 15 v10 - 20

OVERVIEW:

Wash yourself to what degree is fitting, but above all wash with virtues and not with water only (CHRYSOSTOM). Food cannot defile a person. It also cannot make a person holy. Thus eating the bread of the Lord’s Supper cannot in itself make a person holy. In addition, evil actions themselves defile a person only because they share in the defilement produced by evil thoughts. The real source of actions that defile a person is the heart, where the evil thoughts begin that lead to evil acts (ORIGEN). Jesus teaches that there is a difference between what proceeds from the heart and what proceeds from the stomach: one remains; the other does not (CHRYSOSTOM). That which does not reach to the heart is not able to cause the person to become unclean (CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA). The food laws were given to curb immoderate appetites so that the people of God might be more easily disciplined (CHROMATIUS). The soul or principle of action is not according to Plato in the brain but according to Christ in the heart. We should repudiate those who believe that thoughts are introduced by the devil and do not originate from our own will (JEROME).

15:10 | Hearing and Understanding

HE CALLED THE PEOPLE TO HIM

CHRYSOSTOM: He does not simply reveal to them what he has to say but first makes his message easy to receive by respect and courtesy. For the Evangelist showed this when he said, “Jesus called the crowd to himself.” Then he also makes his message easy to receive by its timing. For it comes after the rebuttal of his critics, his victory over them and the accusation cited from the prophet. It is then that he begins the process of instituting a law, when the things that he is saying were even more easily accepted.

In addition, he does not simply call them to himself but also makes them more attentive. For he says, “Take notice,” that is, “Start thinking, wake up.” For the law he was about to enact was such that it required attention. “For you listened when the Pharisees and scribes from Jerusalem nullified the law because of their own tradition and at the wrong time. Since this is so, much more should you listen to me as I lead you into a greater philosophy at the appropriate time.”

He also did not say, “The observance of food laws is nothing,” or “Moses did a poor job of making laws,” or “Moses only made these laws as a way of coming down to your level.” Instead, he speaks to them on the level of advice and counsel and took the testimony of natural phenomena. He does this when he says, “Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man.” In this statement he appeals to nature itself both in the process of instituting law and in the process of revealing what he has to say. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 51.3. [1]

[1] PG 58:513; NPNF 1 10:316-17.

15:11 | What Comes Out of the Mouth

NOT WHAT ENTERS INTO THE MOUTH MAKES ONE HOLY

ORIGEN: Now anyone who has come to this place in the text can agree that it is “not what goes into the mouth that defiles a man, but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man,” even if it is considered to be defiling by Jews. In exactly the same way it is “not what enters into the mouth” that makes the person holy. This is so even if that which is called the bread of the Lord is considered to make the person holy by some of the more impeccable disciples. The two cases are similar. It is not the food but the conscience of the one who eats with doubt about its propriety that defiles the person who has eaten. For “the one who doubts is condemned if one eats, because one is not eating from faith.” [1] It is also like the case in which “nothing is pure to the one who is defiled and unbelieving.” [2] The thing involved is impure not because of itself but because of the person’s defilement and unbelief. In the same way, that which is “made holy through the word of God and prayer” does not on its own account make the one who uses it holy. [3] For if it did, it would also make holy the one who eats of the Lord “in an unworthy manner” and no one would become “weak” or “sickly” or would “sleep” because of this food. For this is what Paul showed in the statement, “Because of this many among you are weak and sickly and a significant number are falling asleep.” [4] Therefore, in the case of the bread of the Lord, the one who uses it derives benefit when one shares in the bread with a mind that is undefiled and a conscience that is pure. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 11.14-15. [5]

[1] Rom 14:23.

[2] Tit 1:15.

[3] 1 Tim 4:5 (cf. 1 Tim 4:3-5).

[4] 1 Cor 11:30.

[5] GCS 40:57-58; ANF 9:443.

THE SPRING OF SINS

ORIGEN: We are accused by the Jews and Ebionites [1] of being violators of the laws that we read in Leviticus and Deuteronomy concerning clean and unclean food. But by means of what is said in this passage we are clearly taught by the Savior not to think that the simple meaning of these laws is the aim intended in the Scripture. For Jesus says, “Not that which enters into the mouth defiles a person but that which comes out of the mouth.” Especially significant is what is said in the Gospel of Mark: “Thus he declared all foods clean.” [2] Since all this is so, it is obvious that we are not defiled when we eat things that are said to be unclean by Jews, who want to serve the letter of the law. Instead, we are defiled when we say whatever happens to be on our mind and we talk about things that we should not talk about, even though our lips should be bound “with perception” and we should make for them “a measuring balance and a standard of measure.” The spring of sins comes to us from such talking. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 11.12. [3]

[1] Christians of strongly Jewish tendencies. From the end of the second century they were considered heretics.

[2] Mk 7:19.

[3] GCS 40:52-53; ANF 9:440.

FOOD AS SUCH DOES NOT DEFILE

CHROMATIUS: The Lord wanted to show up the uncalled-for offense taken by the scribes and the Pharisees about unwashed hands. So he beckoned the crowd to him and said, “What goes into the mouth does not defile a man; but that which comes out of the mouth, that defiles a man.” He explained that a man is defiled not from the food that enters his mouth but from the perverse thoughts of his mind, which proceed from his heart. For the food we receive for eating was created and blessed by God to sustain human life. So, it cannot defile a man. Indeed, wicked and perverse thoughts that proceed from the heart, as the Lord himself noted—“murder, adultery, fornication, theft, false witness, blasphemy,” [1] the author of which is the devil—these are the things that really defile a man. TRACTATE ON MATTHEW 53.2. [2]

[1] Mt 15:19.

[2] CCL 9a:463.

15:12 | Offending the Pharisees

THE PHARISEES WERE OFFENDED

CHRYSOSTOM: The disciples were saying these things not only because they felt pain on behalf of the Pharisees but also because they themselves were a little confused. But since they did not dare to say this out of concern for their own confusion, they hoped to learn further by listening to Jesus’ own elaboration of this issue. To show that this is so, listen to what is said after these things by Peter, who was hotheaded and everywhere arriving before the rest. He says, “Explain this parable to us.” [1] By this he reveals the confusion in his soul. He does not dare to say openly, “I take offense at this,” but he expects that he will be released from his confusion by the interpretation of the parable. So he too was rebuked. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 51.4. [2]

[1] The statement that Jesus makes in Mt 15:11 is not what the modern reader may think of as a parable. But the word parable did not just apply to short illustrations like those found in Mt 13. It also referred to any wise saying, example or proverb by which a point was taught.

[2] PG 58:514; NPNF 1 10:317.

15:13 | Rooting Up What God Has Not Planted

THEIR OWN PRECEPTS

CHROMATIUS: Since the scribes and Pharisees had burst forth in great arrogance and transgressed the divine law, they “planted” their own precepts but not God’s. They wanted these to be observed as divine law. So, not without good reason, did they too, with this planting of their own doctrine, deserve to be uprooted by the Lord. And so the Lord said, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be rooted up.” Indeed, that plant was not of God but of people. Any iniquitous plant, not only of the scribes and Pharisees but also of all heretics, shall be uprooted by the Lord. Though it may extend its branches of infidelity in due season, it cannot be firmly rooted, for such a plant is not of God but of the devil. Furthermore, it must be uprooted and consigned to perpetual fire, since it yields no fruit of faith and wholesomeness. TRACTATE ON MATTHEW 53.7. [1]

[1] CCL 9a:467.

GOD’S PLANTINGS

CHRYSOSTOM: Why therefore does Messiah say, “Every plant that my heavenly Father did not plant will be uprooted”? Those who are diseased with the ideas of the Manichaeans say that this was said about the law. [1] But what Jesus had said before this shuts their mouths. For if he were speaking about the law, why did he earlier make a defense on its behalf and fight for it when he said, “Why are you transgressing the commandment of God because of your tradition?” And why does he bring in the prophet [Isaiah] in front of everyone? [2] Contrary to what the Manichaeans say, Jesus says these things about the Pharisees themselves and their traditions. For God said, “Honor your father and your mother.” This statement from God surely is a plant of God. [3] THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 51.4. [4]

[1] The Manichaeans were the followers of a teacher named Mani (216-276 A.D.). Mani and his followers believed that the world was radically divided into two independent principles of light and darkness. Mani taught that the good God was characterized by light, while the material world was inherently dark and corrupt. Mani believed that Jesus and other teachers came to release souls of light from prison in material bodies. Because so many of the Old Testament laws concerned physical practices, Mani believed that the Old Testament laws were the product of the forces of darkness. Thus the Manichaeans believed that Jesus and other teachers taught that the Old Testament law was “a plant that the heavenly Father would uproot.”

[2] This refers to the quote from Is 29:13 in Mt 15:8-9.

[3] Ex 20:12; Deut 5:16.

[4] PG 58:515; NPNF 1 10:317-18.

GOD GIVES GROWTH TO HIS PLANTINGS

JEROME: Even what seems to be clear in the Scriptures presents many problems. Christ said, “Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted.” Does this mean, therefore, that there will be uprooted also that plant which the apostle speaks of when Paul says, “I have planted, Apollos watered”? The problem is solved, however, from the words that follow: “But God has given the growth.” [1] He also says, “You are God’s field, God’s building.” [2] And in another place we read, “We are God’s coworkers”; [3] therefore, if we are his coworkers, with Paul planting and Apollos watering, God plants and waters with his workers. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 2.15.13. [4]

[1] 1 Cor 3:7.

[2] 1 Cor 3:9.

[3] 1 Cor 3:9.

[4] CCL 77:130.

15:14 | Blind Guides

BLIND LEADERS OF THE BLIND

ORIGEN: “They are blind guides of blind people.” Who are these blind guides? The Pharisees, whose minds “the god of this age has blinded” because they are “unbelieving,” since they did not believe in Jesus Christ. The god of this age has blinded them “so that the light of the gospel of the glory of God in the face of Christ would not shine on them.” [1] We ought to avoid being guided by those blind persons. Not only should we do this, but we certainly should also listen with caution in the case of those who claim to lead in the way of healthy teaching and ought to apply healthy judgment to what they say. We should do these things so that we ourselves do not appear to be blind because we do not see the meaning of the Scriptures. We would become blind like this if we were guided by the ignorance of people who are blind and people who do not perceive the issues of healthy teaching. If we were led by such people, both the one who leads and the one who is led would fall into the pit. [2] COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 11.14. [3]

[1] 2 Cor 4:4.

[2] In some translations the Greek word used here is translated “ditch,” but the word is a generic word for any deep pit or hole. The word usually referred to wells or cisterns dug to collect rainwater. Often these pits were cut deep into solid rock. Wells and cisterns were typically at least as deep as 13 feet, and many were two or three times this deep. From the wide bottom the sides often gradually sloped closer together like the sides of a bottle as one moved upward. The opening at the surface of the ground was often only a couple of feet wide. Channels cut in the rock at the surface of the ground directed water into the cistern in the winter, and the small opening prevented evaporation in the summer. If the cistern was not covered or marked properly, the small opening that appeared on the surface of the ground created a hazard that might go unnoticed even by someone who could see (cf. Jer 38:6).

[3] GCS 40:56; ANF 9:442.

LET THEM ALONE

CHROMATIUS: He then goes on to say, “Let them alone; they are blind guides of blind men. But if a blind man guide a blind man, both fall into a pit.” These words were intended to expose the scribes and Pharisees, who were blinded by the error of their unbelief. Not only were they unable to recognize the light of truth—not believing in Christ—but also they were attracting others into the pit of death. Nevertheless the words also apply to heretics. [1] Denying that Christ is the “true light from true light, and God from God,” [2] they too were steeped in blindness. Because of their perverse doctrine, they also proved to be guides and leaders to those adrift. TRACTATE ON MATTHEW 53.8. [3]

[1] Chromatius had in mind the Arians, reflecting analogically from his time to the time of Matthew.

[2] Nicean-Constantinopolitan Creed.

[3] CCL 9a:467.

15:15-16 | Still Without Understanding

WITHOUT UNDERSTANDING

CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA: “Without understanding” is what the Lord calls those who, like the Pharisees, make a fuss about external matters and have not yet discovered the inner life. Meats, therefore, he says, have to do with filling up the body, but they do not reach into the heart. But that which does not reach to the heart is not able to defile the faithful [genuine] man or cause him to become unclean. FRAGMENT 185. [1]

[1] MKGK 213-14.

15:17 | What Passes On

WHY FOOD LAWS WERE GIVEN

CHROMATIUS: The Pharisees, as Peter made clear, begrudgingly grasped the dictum of the Lord which says, “It is not what enters the mouth that defiles a man.” God indicated through Moses long ago that not everything about the use of food must be considered clean. He declared that certain things were clean and other things were unclean. But now we must ask why God prohibited the people long ago to eat these things. Since all things created by God to be used as human food were blessed at the very beginning and they remain no less so by their very nature, why is it that divine law later prescribed to the Jewish people certain things as lawful for eating because they were clean and certain things as unlawful because they were unclean? First, precepts of this type were given by the Lord because of the dissipation and immoderate appetite of the people. For since they were overly concerned with eating and drinking, these people began to overlook God’s precepts. They made for themselves a molten calf in Horeb, about which it was written, “The people sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play.” [1] Those necessary things were forbidden by the Lord, so that with the best food having been denied and their immoderate appetites mortified, the people might abide more easily by the discipline of divine observance. It was only after their disobedience with the molten calf that we find those things were prohibited. Concerning them, as though to rebuke this stiff-necked people, the Lord made a mild and merciful pronouncement: “They shall be unclean to you.” Not that they are in themselves unclean, but “shall be.” Nor did he say “to all” but “to you.” He thus made it clear that neither were they unclean nor would they be unclean to people other than themselves. And certainly they deserved this prohibition of many foods, for these people preferred the meats of Egypt, as well as cucumbers and muskmelons, to heavenly manna. TRACTATE ON MATTHEW 53.3. [2]

[1] Ex 32:6.

[2] CCL 9a:463-64.

15:18 | What Proceeds from the Heart

THE STOMACH COMPARED WITH THE HEART

CHRYSOSTOM: Note how sharply he deals with them and how he delivers his rebuke. He rebukes with a view to their cure. He appeals to our common human nature when he says, “Whatever goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and so passes on.” Even if it did abide for a while, it would not make one unclean. Yet they were not able to hear this. Because of this the lawgiver allows just so much time for the law to have effect. After it has gone through one’s system, it is dispelled. At evening he asks you to wash yourself and so be clean. The time of digesting and excreting is a limited time. But in matters of the heart, they abide within. He is not making a refutation of the goodness of the nature of things. Rather, Jesus is speaking of the difference between what proceeds from the stomach and what proceeds from the heart. One does not remain; the other does. One enters in from the outside. The other goes out from the inside, and having gone forth it may defile, and the more it goes out the more it defiles. They were not yet able to be taught these things. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 51.4. [1]

[1] PG 58:515-16; NPNF 1 10:318.

15:19 | Evil Thoughts

OUT OF THE HEART

JEROME: “Out of the heart,” he said, “come evil thoughts.” Therefore the soul or principle of action is not in the brain according to Plato but in the heart according to Christ. [1] On this point, those who believe that thoughts are introduced by the devil and do not originate from our own will are to be repudiated. The devil can aid and abet evil thoughts but he cannot originate them, even though, ever lying in wait, he kindles a small spark of our thoughts with his tinder. We must not hold the opinion that the devil can also probe the depths of our heart. However, he can judge from our demeanor and gestures what we are thinking about. For example, if he sees us gazing often at a beautiful woman, he surmises that our heart has been wounded with the dart of love. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 2.15.19. [2]

[1] To understand this observation, one should keep in mind that contemporary schools of philosophy debated whether the rational and directive faculties of the soul resided in the brain or in the heart.

[2] CCL 77:131-32.

15:20 | What Defiles and What Does Not

THESE ARE WHAT DEFILE

ORIGEN: These things are what “defiles the person” when they come out from the heart and, after they have gone out from it, go through the mouth. Thus if they did not occur outside of the heart but were held by the person somewhere around the heart, not being allowed to be spoken through the mouth, they would very quickly disappear and the person would not be defiled any longer. Therefore the source and beginning of every sin is “evil reasonings.” For if these reasonings did not prevail, there would be neither murders nor acts of adultery nor any other of such things. Because of this each one ought to keep one’s own heart with all watchfulness. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 11.14-15. [1]

[1] GCS 40:57-58; ANF 9:443-44.

WASH YOURSELF WITH VIRTUE

CHRYSOSTOM: “To eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man.” Let us learn then what are the things that defile the person. Let us learn them and flee from them. For even in the church we still see such a custom prevailing among many that gives great attention to what we are wearing and whether we have our hands washed. But as to presenting a clean soul to God, they make no account. I say wash to what degree is fitting, but above all wash with virtues and not with water only. No one is forbidding the washing of the hands or mouth, but the real filth of the mouth is evil speaking, blasphemy, reviling, angry words, filthy talking, inordinate laughter and immature jesting. If you are not conscious of yourself doing these things or of being defiled with this filth, then draw near with confidence. But if you have often done these things and received these stains, why do you think that washing your tongue with water is going to change anything? You labor in vain to wash it out externally, while you are still inwardly carrying such deadly and hurtful filth. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 51.4-5. [1]

A WOMAN’S FAITH MATTHEW 15:21-28

[1] PG 58:515-16; NPNF 1 10:318-19.

OVERVIEW:

This woman is the mother of the Gentiles. The Lord had left Jewish territory, and the Canaanite woman had come out from her Gentile territory. He left the Jews behind, and the woman was leaving behind idolatry. What the Gentiles had lost, she found through her faith (EPIPHANIUS THE LATIN). She was appealing on behalf of her daughter, who was a type for all the Gentile peoples. Since she knew the Lord from the law, she addressed him as Son of David (HILARY OF POITIERS). Jesus himself opened the way for the Gentiles after nullifying the food laws that separated Jews from Gentiles. His contact with the Gentile woman was not his reason for being in the area of Tyre, but his compassionate nature prevented him from turning her away (CHRYSOSTOM). That he came first to Israel does not imply that salvation was not to be imparted also to the Gentiles (HILARY OF POITIERS). Jesus was unwilling to give his detractors an opportunity to accuse him. He was reserving a fully accomplished salvation for the Gentiles at the time of his Passion and resurrection (JEROME). He had to manifest in due sequence to Israel first, his birth, the display of miracles and then the power of his resurrection (AUGUSTINE). The Canaanite woman was in effect saying, You came to the Jews, and they didn’t want you. What they turned down, give to us (EPIPHANIUS THE LATIN). He postponed giving her a reply that she might cry aloud with this word, and thereby he would show her to be worthy of a thousand crowns (THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA). See how this woman who was a Canaanite—who came from the Gentiles and represented a type, a figure of the church—is highly praised for her humility, while others are puffed up with pride (AUGUSTINE).

15:21 | Going to Tyre and Sidon

THE MOTHER OF THE GENTILES

EPIPHANIUS THE LATIN: After our Lord departed from the Jews, he came into the regions of Tyre and Sidon. He left the Jews behind and came to the Gentiles. Those whom he had left behind remained in ruin; those to whom he came obtained salvation in their alienation. And a woman came out of that territory and cried, saying to him, “Have pity on me, O Lord, Son of David!” O great mystery! The Lord came out from the Jews, and the woman came out from her Gentile territory. He left the Jews behind, and the woman left behind idolatry and an impious lifestyle. What they had lost, she found. The one whom they had denied in the law, she professed through her faith. This woman is the mother of the Gentiles, and she knew Christ through faith. Thus on behalf of her daughter (the Gentile people) she entreated the Lord. The daughter had been led astray by idolatry and sin and was severely possessed by a demon. INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 58. [1]

[1] PL Supp 3:953.

HE WITHDREW TO THE REGION OF TYRE AND SIDON

AUGUSTINE: She was apparently not from the people of Israel, from whom came the patriarchs, the prophets and the parents of Our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh; from whom came the Virgin Mary, who brought forth Christ. Clearly this woman was not from that people but from the Gentiles. For, as we read, the Lord withdrew into the regions of Tyre and Sidon; and then the Canaanite woman, having gone beyond those borders, insistently sought help to heal her daughter who was beset by the devil. Tyre and Sidon were not cities of the people of Israel but of the Gentiles, although they were close to that people. She therefore cried out, eager to get help, and kept insisting. But she was ignored, not that mercy might be denied but that desire might be enkindled; not only that desire might be enkindled but, as I said before, that humility might be praised. SERMON 77.1. [1]

[1] PL 38:483; NPNF 1 6:342 (Sermon 27).

15:22 | A Canaanite Woman Cries Out to Jesus

THE GENTILES CRY FOR THE SON OF DAVID

HILARY OF POITIERS: To grasp the inner motive of the Canaanite woman for obtaining what came to pass, we must reflect on the impact of her words. There is a firm belief that there was and still is in Israel a community of proselytes who passed over from the Gentiles into the works of the law. They had left behind their previous life and were bonded by the religion of a foreign and dominating law as though from home. The Canaanites were inhabiting the lands of present-day Judea. Whether absorbed by war or dispersed to neighboring places or brought into servitude as a vanquished people, they carried about their name but lacked a native land. Intermingled with the Jews, therefore, these people came from the Gentiles. And since a portion of those among the crowds who believed were proselytes, this Canaanite woman most likely had left her territory, preferring the status of a proselyte—that is, coming out from the Gentiles to the community of a neighboring people. She was appealing on behalf of her daughter, who was a type for all the Gentile people. And since she knew the Lord from the law, she addressed him as Son of David. For in the law, the king of the eternal and heavenly kingdom is referred to as the “rod out of the stem of Jesse and the son of David.” [1] This woman, who professed Christ as both Lord and Son of David, did not need any healing. Rather, she was begging for help for her daughter—that is, the Gentile people in the grips of unclean spirits. ON MATTHEW 15.3. [2]

[1] Is 11:1.

[2] SC 258:36-38.

FROM THAT REGION

CHRYSOSTOM: Mark says that Jesus was not able to escape notice after he had come into the house. [1] But why did he go away to these parts of the region at all? When he released them from the observance of food laws, then he finally also opened a door to the Gentiles as he proceeded on the road. This anticipates the similar act of Peter, who first received a command to put an end to this law and then was sent to Cornelius. [2]

But if anyone should say, “Why then does he allow this woman to approach him when he says to the disciples, ‘Do not go in the way of the Gentiles’?” [3] We first note that he himself, being who he is, was not, strictly speaking, required to obey the command that he gave to the disciples. We observe, second, that Jesus was not going there to preach. This is the very point that Mark implies when he says both that Jesus hid himself and that he could not escape notice. The fact that he did not run to them first was consistent with the order of the tasks set before him. In exactly the same way, driving away people who were coming to him was unworthy of his love for humanity. For if one should pursue those who are trying to escape, much more should one not try to escape those who are pursuing. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 52.1. [4]

[1] Mk 7:24.

[2] Acts 10:1-48.

[3] Mt 10:5.

[4] PG 58:517-19; NPNF 1 10:321.

15:23 | Jesus Ignores the Woman

SEND HER AWAY

EPIPHANIUS THE LATIN: Therefore this woman besought the Lord on behalf of her daughter, the church of the Gentiles. “But he did not answer her a word.” It was not that the Lord was unwilling to heal her but that he might reveal her great faith and humility. Then the disciples were moved to mercy and pleaded with the Lord, saying, “Send her away, for she is crying after us.” But he answered and said, “I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Now he said this to the crowd of Jews that they might have no excuse on the day of judgment, when they might pretend to say, “He wanted to come to the Gentiles rather than to us.” INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 57. [1]

[1] PL Supp 3:953-54.

15:24 | Only to the House of Israel

I WAS SENT TO ISRAEL

HILARY OF POITIERS: The Lord remains patiently silent, reserving the privilege of salvation for Israel. And the pitying disciples join in a plea. But he, holding in his hands the secret of his Father’s will, answers that he was sent to the lost sheep of Israel. It thus became absolutely clear that the daughter of the Canaanite woman represented a type of the church when the woman kept asking for what was bestowed upon the others. Not that salvation was not to be imparted also to the Gentiles, but the Lord had come to his own and among his own, awaiting the first fruits of faith from those people he took his roots from. The others subsequently had to be saved by the preaching of the apostles. And so he said, “It is not fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” [1] The Gentile people are dubbed with the name of dogs. But the Canaanite woman is saved because of her faith. Certain of the inner mystery, she responds by talking about crumbs that fall from the table, to be eaten by little dogs. The disparagement of “dogs” was mitigated by the blandishment of a diminutive name. ON MATTHEW 15.4. [2]

[1] Mt 15:26.

[2] SC 258:38.

UNWILLING TO GIVE DETRACTORS AN OPPORTUNITY TO ACCUSE HIM

JEROME: Jesus did not say this to accord with the pride of the Pharisees or the arrogance of the scribes but lest he seem to contradict the instruction he had earlier given: “Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans.” [1] For he was unwilling to give his detractors an opportunity to accuse him and was reserving a fully accomplished salvation for the Gentiles at the time of his Passion and resurrection. The disciples, yet unaware of the mysteries of the Lord or having been moved to mercy, beseeched the Lord on behalf of the Canaanite woman (whom the other Evangelist calls a Syro-Phoenician). Or else they wanted to be rid of this importuning woman, for she repeatedly called upon him loudly, not as though he were a kind but an austere physician. COMMENTARY ON MATTHEW 2.15.23. [2]

[1] Mt 10:5.

[2] CCL 77:132-33.

THE LOST SHEEP

AUGUSTINE: A question arises here on that point: How is it that we have come from the Gentiles to the sheepfold of Christ if he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? What is the meaning of this puzzling dispensation? The Lord knew why he came—certainly to have a church among all the Gentiles—and he yet said that he was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? We accordingly understand that he had to manifest in due sequence to that people first the presence of his body, his birth, the display of miracles and then the power of his resurrection. It had thus been predetermined from the beginning, such and such had been foretold and fulfilled, that Christ Jesus had to come to the Jewish people and to be seen and killed and to win for himself those whom he knew beforehand. The Gentiles were not to be condemned but to be winnowed like grain. A multitude of chaff was there, the hidden dignity of grain was there, burning was to take place there, and a storehouse to be filled there. In fact, where were the apostles if not there? Where was Peter? Where were the rest? SERMON 77.2. [1]

[1] PL 38:483; NPNF 1 6:342-43 (Sermon 27).

15:25-26 | Giving the Children’s Bread to the Dogs

A STRANGE TRANSFORMATION

EPIPHANIUS THE LATIN: Then, in face of the Jews who were rejecting him, this Gentile woman asked him to heal her daughter. But the Lord turned a deaf ear to her. She fell down at his feet and adored him, saying, “Lord, help me.” The Lord then said to her, “It is not fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs.” What have the Jews to say to this? Plainly he implied that they were children and called the Gentiles “dogs.” The woman agreed, saying to the Savior, “Yes, Lord.” That is to say, I know, Lord, that the Gentile people are dogs in worshiping idols and barking at God. “Yet even the little dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” In other words, you came to the Jews and manifested yourself to them, and they didn’t want you to make exceptions. What they rejected, give to us who are asking for it. Knowing the importunate faith of this woman, our Lord said, “O woman, your faith is great! Let it be done for you as you desire.” Faith accepts what work does not merit, and through faith the Gentiles were made children out of dogs. As the Lord spoke through the prophet: “In the place where it was said to them, ‘You are not my people’ it shall be said to them, ‘Sons of the living God.’ ” [1] On the other hand, the unreceptive Jews were made loathsome dogs out of children, as the Lord himself said in his Passion through the prophet: “Many dogs surround me; a company of evildoers encircle me.” [2] INTERPRETATION OF THE GOSPELS 58. [3]

[1] Hos 1:10.

[2] Ps 22:16 (21:17 LXX).

[3] PL Supp 3:954.

15:27 | Even the Dogs Eat Crumbs

CRUMBS FROM THEIR MASTERS’ TABLE

CHRYSOSTOM: See her humility as well as her faith! For he had called the Jews “children,” but she was not satisfied with this. She even called them “masters,” so far was she from grieving at the praises of others. She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters’ table.” Behold the woman’s wisdom! She did not venture so much as to say a word against anyone else. She was not stung to see others praised, nor was she indignant to be reproached. Behold her constancy. When he answered, “It is not fair to take the children’s bread and throw it to the dogs,” she said, “Yes, Lord.” He called them “children,” but she called them “masters.” He used the name of a dog, but she described the action of the dog. Do you see this woman’s humility?

Then compare her humility with the proud language of the Jews: “We are Abraham’s seed and were never in bondage to any man.” [1] “We are born of God.” [2] But not so this woman. Rather, she calls herself a dog and them masters. So for this reason she became a child. For what does Christ then say? “O woman, great is your faith.”

So we might surmise that this is the reason he put her off, in order that he might proclaim aloud this saying and that he might crown the woman: “Be it done for you as you desire.” This means “Your faith, indeed, is able to effect even greater things than these. Nevertheless be it unto you even as you wish.” This voice was at one with the voice that said, “Let the heaven be,” and it was. [3]

“And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.”

Do you see how this woman, too, contributed not a little to the healing of her daughter? For note that Christ did not say, “Let your little daughter be made whole,” but “Great is your faith, be it done for you as you desire.” These words were not uttered at random, nor were they flattering words, but great was the power of her faith, and for our learning.

He left the certain test and demonstration, however, to the issue of events. Her daughter accordingly was immediately healed. THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW, HOMILY 52.3. [4]

[1] Jn 8:33.

[2] Jn 8:41.

[3] Gen 1:1.

[4] PG 58:521; NPNF 1 10:323.

15:28 | Be It Done As You Desire

GREAT IS YOUR FAITH

THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA: Having seen her advocates unsuccessful, the woman then appeals for herself and does not stop but in effect says to the Lord, “Help me, I haven’t been asking this for my own sake.” Then the Savior in turn says, “It is not good to take the children’s bread and to cast it to dogs.” He uses the term dog on account of the Gentiles’ unclean lifestyle and proneness to idolatry, while he calls the Jews children on account of the fact that they appeared to be devoted to God. But he uses the word bread not only to speak of his teaching, which was through words, but also of that which nourished the faithful by means of signs. But in this case the word preceded the condemnation of the Jews, since when life in the Lord had been given to them as bread, they did not accept it. The woman does not complain, even when insulted. What does the Savior do? By his answer, he showed what he had premeditated from the outset. For it was for this reason that he postponed giving a reply: that the woman might cry aloud with this word. Thereby he would show her to be worthy of a thousand crowns. For it was not because he did not want to give her the gift that he delayed but because he sought and took care beforehand to reveal her faith. With his accolades he honors her as presenting a type of the church that is from the Gentiles. Note that he did not say, “Let your child be healed,” but “Be it done for you as you desire,” in order to show that it was the power of her faith that elicited the healing. Even if she were worthy of even greater things, nevertheless that which she wanted was what was given to her. FRAGMENT 83. [1]

[1] MKGK 126-27.

HER DAUGHTER WAS HEALED INSTANTLY

AUGUSTINE: See, brothers, how in this woman who was a Canaanite—who came from the Gentiles and represented a type (namely, a figure of the church)—how her humility is highly praised. Indeed, the Jewish people, as castigated in the Gospel, were puffed up with pride because they were chosen to receive the law, because the patriarchs proceeded from that people, the prophets appeared and God’s servant Moses performed great miracles in Egypt, which we hear about in the Psalms. [1] He led the people through the Red Sea with the waters receding, and he received the law, which he gave to the same people. These were the grounds for extolling the Jewish people. Because of that pride, they were unwilling to respond to Christ the author of humility, the restrainer of swellheadedness, the physician God who, because he was God, became man that as a man he might know himself as man. What great medicine! If this medicine does not cure pride, what could possibly cure it? I do not know. God became a man. He put aside his divinity. That is to say, in a certain measure he kept out of sight—he hid what was his own, while it was evident what he had taken upon himself. He became a man, even though he is God. Yet man does not yet recognize that he is a man, that he is mortal; he does not recognize that he is weak, a sinner, sick, and that being a sick person, he should seek a physician! What is even worse, he sees himself as being healthy!

Because of this, that people did not draw near—that is, because of their pride. And they were called from the olive tree—that is, from that people begotten of the patriarchs—broken natural branches (namely, Jews by right, barren in the spirit of pride). And in that olive tree a wild olive shoot was grafted. This wild olive shoot represents the Gentile people. But the apostle says that the wild shoot was grafted into the olive tree but the natural branches were broken. [2] They were broken because of pride; the wild olive shoot was grafted in because of humility. The woman manifested this humility, saying, “Yes, Lord, I am a dog. I desire crumbs.” Jesus found favor also with the centurion, who had this humility. After he asked the Lord to cure his servant, the Lord said, “I will come and cure him.” He responded, “Lord, I am not worthy that you should come under my roof; but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. I am not worthy that you should come under my roof.” [3] He did not receive the Lord under his roof; he received him in his heart. The more humble a person is, the more receptive and full he becomes. Hills repel water; valleys are filled up. What did the Lord reply, after the centurion said, “I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof”? He said, “Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith” [4] —that is, among those people to whom I have come, “I have not found such faith.” What is the meaning of the word such? So great. In what way great? To say the least, great in humility. “I have not found such faith”: like a grain of mustard seed—the smaller it is, the more potent it is. The Lord therefore grafted the wild olive shoot into the olive tree. He did this when he said, “Truly, I say to you, not even in Israel have I found such faith.” SERMON 77.11-12. [5]

[1] Ps 106 (105 LXX).

[2] Rom 11:17-24.

[3] Mt 8:7-8.

[4] Mt 8:10.

[5] PL 38:487-88; NPNF 1 6:345-46 (Sermon 27).