The Canaanite Woman of Matthew 15 by Lynn H. Cohick

The story of the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:21-28 (cf. Mark 7.24-30) is one of the most problematic stories in the New Testament. The characters seem all mixed up, with Jesus as the rude antagonist and a pagan woman as the righteous defender of the faith. Moreover, the story is difficult to classify: is it a healing narrative or a sayings-of-Jesus story or a conversion account? Matthew draws attention to the geographical place and the ethnicity of those in the story. I suggest attending to those details as well as having an appreciation for the honor-shame culture of the day helps sort out the confusion.

The stage is set in the region around the gentile cities of Tyre and Sidon, located north of Galilee. In a public venue, perhaps while Jesus and his disciples were walking or Jesus was teaching, a woman cries out for mercy. Matthew’s details are important. First, she is called a Canaanite woman, a reference to Israel’s past arch-enemy. Mark uses the contemporary designation: Syro-Phoenician (Mk 7.26). Matthew chooses a theologically charged description that intensifies the distance between the two. However, Jesus’ genealogy includes the Canaanites' Tamar (Gen. 38) and Rahab (Josh. 2), so the reader knows that in some sense, this woman in Matthew 15.21f. can claim to be “family” in an important theological sense that unfolds as the story plays out. Second, Matthew notes she approaches Jesus directly. Because of this some interpreters suggest that she is an immoral woman or at least one without a husband. But this conclusion is based on a faulty reading of later rabbinic material; recent scholarship has shown that respectable women were active in public spaces, so our protagonist should not be understood as dissolute or husbandless, only very needy. Her daughter is desperately ill.

At this point, the reader assumes Jesus will heal her daughter and go on his way. But instead he makes two astonishing statements, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel,” and “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to the dogs.” Did he just call this distraught mother a dog?

A way forward is to start not with Jesus’ statements, but with the woman’s behavior. It fits a type common in ancient literature wherein a subject approaches their leader with a request, which is initially dismissed, but later conceded to. In the exchange, the leader is shone to be just and fair, and the subject is judged virtuous. Both receive public honor, a win-win situation which was uncommon in the zero-sum game of honor/shame that structured the ancient world’s social customs.

For example, Macrobius (Saturnalia 2.4.27) tells the story of an old soldier who desires the emperor Augustus to speak on his behalf in court. Initially the emperor refuses to go himself but offers to send a representative. At this the man raises his sleeve to expose his scars and shouts that he did not seek a substitute when fighting for Augustus at Actium. Macrobius notes that Augustus was suitably chastened. Not wanting to appear haughty or ungrateful, Augustus appeared in court, thereby serving his subordinate and highlighting his noble character. A similar story is told by Dio Cassius (History 69.6.3) about a woman who calls out a request to the emperor Hadrian as he passes by. At first he said he hadn’t the time, but when she declared “Cease, then, being emperor” he stopped in his tracks and granted her a hearing.

In sum, the exchange between Jesus and the Canaanite woman fits an ancient trope or image used for rhetorical effect which turns on the virtue of a ruler (like an emperor). Given his high status, the leader sees no reason to busy himself with the problems of the average poor in his kingdom. But a good king will be chastened of that self-important spirit and respond with grace to the request.

Now I’m not suggesting that Jesus was haughty! But I am proposing that this encounter fits a pattern whereby a ruler who had every social right to ignore a plea was nevertheless shown to be compassionate by acceding to his subject’s wishes. Most people would have thought it proper for Jesus, a Jewish prophet, to ignore the cries of someone far beneath him on the social order – a gentile woman. Therefore, Matthew’s portrayal of Jesus’ largess would not be lost on the crowd. Nor in this scenario is the petitioner denigrated. She maintains her high view of Jesus even as his behavior seemingly signaled otherwise. In fact, she had a much higher view of him than did his disciples, who were content to have him dismiss her. But Jesus shows he is a superior leader/prophet by recognizing righteousness when all others fail to see it. And he rewards the one who demonstrates virtue.

It is not the case, then, that Jesus lost an argument, as is often claimed. The incident revealed his character; it did not change his mind in the sense that Jesus now saw his ministry differently. The woman gave him the opportunity to highlight his good leadership qualities. Moreover, the dialogue presented the woman a chance to gain honor. She pursued the virtuous course, and with the occasion to speak (and model) uprightness publically, she earned the highest prize in antiquity - honor. She also secured Jesus’ highest praise, “Woman you have great faith.” 

Lynn H. Cohick (PhD in New Testament/Christian Origins, University of Pennsylvania) is associate professor of New Testament in the Department of Biblical and Theological Studies at Wheaton College and Graduate School, Wheaton, IL. Lynn has written on early Jewish/Christian relations in her book, Melito of Sardis: Setting, Purpose, and Sources (Brown Judaic Studies, 2000), and several articles on women in Early Judaism and earliest Christianity. She is coauthor (with Gary Burge and Gene Green) of the much-anticipated The New Testament in Antiquity. Image: Les Très Riches Heures du duc de Berry, Folio 164r - The Canaanite Woman the Musée Condé, Chantilly.

Comments

[James McGrath]

Thanks for posting on this. I do wonder, however, whether there is any reason to say "Jesus wasn't haughty" or "Jesus didn't share typical Jewish prejudices against Canaanites" other than a view of Jesus that is potentially in danger of denying his humanity.

I posted on this story on my own blog a while back. I would love to know what you think of what I wrote there, if you have the time to take a look!

[Mike Bird]

Lynn,
Intriguing post, esp. on GR background. I've never been convinced by the view that the Canaanite woman changed Jesus mind about Gentiles. I imagine him saying "Not fitting ... dogs" with a wry smile and inviting her witty reply.

[Pat]

I've often thought that this exchange and others was more about Jesus proving the person's faith rather than the person proving Jesus' compassion. But maybe this is more a reflection of my theology.

[lynn]

thanks James for your comments, especially pointing out the importance of keeping front and center the truth of Jesus' humanity. However, the position that Jesus was fully human does not entail that he was also sinful. My comment about Jesus not being haughty was simply to distinguish these two things. I was confused by the point you put in quotations about Jesus having prejudices against Canaanites as I did not say anything like that in the piece. But when I referred to your blog, I understood that you were connecting my piece with your presentation. I would still suggest that asserting Jesus' full humanity does not necessitate accepting that he evidenced the foibles and sins of humanity ie prejudices. Said another way, Jesus represents true humanity, what humans were intended to be, the second Adam as Paul suggests in Romans 5 and 1 Cor 15. your thoughts?

[Rod]

I know this post is old, but so many people have twisted this passage to make Jesus look as if he was arrogant or even racist.

Here is a post by a scholar who says Jesus was a racist based on this passage:

http://www.abpnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3870&Itemid=9

Thank you for this!

[joshua walters]

Lynn, thanks for your blog post. However, I feel that Jesus is not being haughty at all; nor is He playing the same social-class games that the 1st century world played.

You are correct that the woman's place of background is the key here. That she was from Syria-Phoenicia meant that she was a wealthy Greek. The wealthier Greeks often referred to the lower-classes as "dogs."

Therefore, I interpret Jesus' words here as a clever way of turning the table on the woman. His sarcastic reply would have caused her to rethink her own worldview. I think it's brilliant.

I prefer this interpretation over most that I have read/heard because I feel that Jesus is always the hero, always the teacher, and always the revealer of the Kingdom of God.

Just my humble opinion. Peace!

[lynn cohick]

Hi Joshua,
thanks for your comment. I'd be interested in the references of wealthy Greeks using 'dogs' for the lower classes. I'm also curious that you assume that because she was from Syria-Phoenicia that she was wealthy. I'm not sure that such a conclusion can be drawn from the story. however, your point that Jews were in this region downtrodden is well taken, but that need not mean that this woman was wealthy. You note that Jesus turned the tables on her - do you think that she came to Jesus expecting to have her request granted? I'm not asking this rhetorically, I think the story is not necessarily clear on this, but if I'm understanding your theory correctly, you are imagining her coming with a posture of arrogance to Jesus. He brings her down a peg or two with his sarcasm - is that your point? My worry with this analysis (if I am getting your meaning correctly here)is that it presents Jesus as teacher in a potentially cruel manner. I'm not sure that as a teacher, I would the situation of a student's daughter's immanent death to bring him/her down in the social sense. And I'd also be interested to get your feedback on this question - do you see it as essential for that woman to understand her own fallenness before Jesus would heal her daughter? You raise some very interesting issues in your comments - thanks very much