Ads


Sign up for our
Email Newsletter

Jesus’s Challenge: “Stand and Deliver”

Both of my sons are wordsmiths and the elder one has a particular facility for delivering groan-inducing puns with such lightning speed that even as you roll your eyes, you can’t help but be a little impressed—or terrified—by how dexterously his brain can associate many things with many other things. A few years ago, during a chat about Traditional Chinese Medicine, I explained that practitioners will advise their patients to nourish and build up the yin energies through autumn and winter and the yang energies in the springtime and summer.

I had barely finished my sentence when he said, “Well, obviously! What’s yanger than springtime?”

A gift for wordplay is the sign of an active, engaged mind, and I always appreciate seeing evidence of Jesus’s vigorous intellect in the bits of affectionate, word-based and rather Semitic humor on display in scripture; I marvel at Jesus’s deft tongue. In Matthew, Chapter 14, Simon and Andrew—probably kvetching at each other as they cast their nets into the sea—needed only one phrase to drop their nets and follow him, and the phrase was a dandy: “Hey, you fishermen . . . follow me; I’ll make you fishers of men!”

I take the point of the women who prefer the more gender-neutral “I’ll make you fishers of persons” but he was addressing fisher men at the time, and the joke—which is delightful—doesn’t really work once it has been neutered. Good straight-men (or straight-persons) know never to step on the punchline.

Given that, I always envision Jesus throwing back his head in good-humored appreciation when—as we see in tomorrow’s reading from Matthew’s Gospel—a Canaanite woman bests him, answering his challenge with one of her own:


And behold, a Canaanite woman of that district came and called out, “Have pity on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is tormented by a demon.” But he did not say a word in answer to her.

His disciples came and asked him, “Send her away, for she keeps calling out after us.”

He said in reply, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” But the woman came and did him homage, saying, “Lord, help me.”

He said in reply, “It is not right to take the food of the children and throw it to the dogs.”

She said, “Please, Lord, for even the dogs eat the scraps that fall from the table of their masters.”

Then Jesus said to her in reply, “O woman, great is your faith! Let it be done for you as you wish.” And her daughter was healed from that hour.

Jesus loves us, this we know, for the bible tells us so, but he never loves us with the sort of syrupy instinct to sentimentalism that can sometimes overtake us when—in our parenting or our socializing—we allow our affections to override the need to speak a truthful word, because it might be seen as discomfiting, or hurtful.

In other words, Jesus never “loves us too much” to challenge us, and that scene above is a good example of it. I have read some commentators suggest that Jesus’s exchange with this woman is an occasion where he is being “dark” or “unloving,” but we really do choose how we receive a thing, and I have never received this gospel story in that negative way. Rather, Jesus seems to me to be acting here as a good teacher who wants his student to “stand and deliver,” so to speak.

Yes, I know—“stand and deliver” is the catchphrase of highwaymen and thieves—but the phrase and thinking works here because what it really breaks down to is, “hand over the goods, deliver to me what is valuable.”

I believe in Jesus’ case, he wants us to open up—to expose and bring forth to him our inmost selves; the valuable goods, as it were.

Jesus is the divine teacher, and a good teacher finds the way to bring out the very best in students—not to simply teach them rote memorization (although that has its place) but to make them “deliver of themselves”; to put something more behind their answers. He does it over and over in the Gospels—makes people declare what it is they want and why they are coming to him. His challenge says, “stand and deliver—so that you may be more fully the man or woman you are, and not some prostrate creature.”

Had this encounter between Jesus and the woman not involved a challenge—had Jesus simply shrugged and healed her daughter upon demand—it would not have been as memorable and a key bit of theological information would not have been passed along to us; the important message to the Gentiles (do not be afraid to seek your salvation here, it is for you, too) might have been lost.

Perhaps more importantly, on a personal level, the woman would not have been uplifted in a public way; she would not have had her cleverness—a gift of her individuality and a sign of her God-intended unique personhood—acknowledged. She would have simply been one more woman ducking her head and lowering her eyes. Instead—after an encounter with Christ—she had dignity and could hold her head up. I believe those are the reasons Christ challenged her.

This is a wonderful story and Jesus made here a generous challenge to a woman who had been raised in a culture that thought of her as mere chattel: show me who you are, he said. Stand up tall. Be yourself. Speak your piece. There is nothing “dark” in any of that.

And there could not ever have been, in any case, for Christ Jesus is all truth, and all light.

Elizabeth Scalia is the Managing Editor of the Catholic Portal at Patheos and blogs as The Anchoress. Her previous articles for "On the Square" can be found here.

Become a fan of First Things on Facebook, subscribe to First Things via RSS, and follow First Things on Twitter.

Comments:

8.7.2012 | 2:44am
Frank Pray says:
Ms. Scalia identifies just one of several Gospel passages that show Jesus was not only ahead of His time, but our time as well. The Vatican is simply wrong to hang its case against the ordination of women on the absence of an "official" apostle who was female. Jesus's radical attitude toward women is supported strongly by the Gospel stories, and by the important role of women in the infant church. The image of God is neither male, nor female, but is found in both male and female. Is any part of God subordinate to another? Jesus recognized women as leaders. He sent the woman at the well to preach the Good News to a Samaritan village. He revealed his resurrection first to women, and charged them to communicate with their cowering male counterparts. The women in Acts provided funding and places to meet for the early Church. So Rome, its time to catch up with Jesus.
8.7.2012 | 5:00am
Thank you! I have heard several priests interpret this as showing that Jesus had the bigotry of his culture and time and that this episode shows him learning to step outside of them and to love non-Jews. I can't accept that he shared the prejudices of his milieu. He looked into peoples' souls and loved them. I believe this can be interpreted as Jesus saying, "All my fellow Jews here see you as degraded and unworthy. They say you are unclean and I should shun you. What do you say?"

As you, explain, she says, wittily, she is worthy of love and her faith is as theirs. And He says, of course. Thank you for pointing out her wit and Jesus responding with appreciation. It doesn't mean she feels or he agrees she is a "dog."
8.7.2012 | 8:10am
Mark VA says:
This biblical passage has an edge to it.

I hope that the soul of this Caananite woman will forgive me for speculating, but I suspect that the turns of this exchange may have something to do with her past pride of being a Caananite. Yet in this exchage, she showed herself capable of humility, because she loved her daughter.

Thus she delivered to Christ what was most valuable in her.
8.7.2012 | 10:45am
Kate Pitrone says:
Or, being fully human, Jesus changed his mind when he saw that the woman was so desperate that she would agree to have herself characterized as a dog to get that healing for her daughter. Perhaps he had his own prejudices about Canaanites to overcome. Perhaps the Holy Spirit helped him overcome his reluctance. If she was begging him in the first place, she mustn't have been all that proud; hurt to one's child reduces pride. I never see this woman being cute and witty here. I see her finding the loophole in the argument.

Jesus went to the trouble to make himself human. I don't see why we are quick to dismiss his humanity and make him walk around like God. It wasn't just that he was frail in body, he had other of our frailties and overcame them righteously. The lesson is that we should all think so righteously.

I know I could be wrong, being human, but this is how I read this passage.
8.7.2012 | 10:56am
I can't help thinking how much better off the whole Church would be if the contretemps between the Vatican and the LCWR were reframed in just such a "stand and deliver" fashion as the dialogue between Jesus and the Canaanite woman. Instead of talking around one another, in lofty pronouncements and disingenuous protests, what if both sides (and I do think in the Gospel story it is a mutual "stand and deliver") challenged each other to reveal their deepest and best commitment to the Gospel, beyond posturing and stereotyping---and stayed engaged long enough to get past the initial sense of rejection? That is always how we "stumble upon" (read: are led by the Spirit to) common ground, which is holy ground.
8.7.2012 | 11:13am
jason taylor says:
What does this story have to do with whether women should be priests?
8.7.2012 | 11:14am
“Hey, you fishermen . . . follow me; I’ll make you fishers of men!” (Matthew ch. 4, not 14)

I hate to disappoint you, but the pun you like so much probably owes more to the wit of English translators than to Jesus. The "fishermen ... fishers of men" pun only works in English (and maybe some other languages, too; I don't know). But it isn't present in the original Greek text of the NT (nor in the Latin Vulgate, for that matter). The word we generally translate as "fishermen", *halieis* (Latin *piscatores*), is really just something like "fishers". And for "men", the Greek text uses *anthropoi* (Latin *homines*), which means "human beings". So what Jesus is saying in the original Greek text is more literally rendered as: "fishers ... I will make you fishers of human beings". Yes, I know that Jesus would have been speaking Aramaic; but the Greek text is as close to an original as we have.
8.7.2012 | 11:17am
Karen says:
Hmmm. After I read your intro on Jesus' humor & word play and then read,

"My daughter is tormented by a demon.” But he did not say a word in answer to her. "

I thought maybe Jesus was saying something about the woman!

But seriously, she was calling out to him but its not until she humbles herself and acknowledges who he is that her daughter is healed. Jesus just doesn't answer her prayer without some serious soul-searching on her part. He not only heals her daughter but he heals her as well.
8.7.2012 | 11:27am
Bella says:
Frank Pray, have you missed the entire history of the Catholic church? Because it seems like you choose to ignore all the women who have been leaders, founders, innovators and builders precisely because they had the backing and encouragement of the church when no one else in society let women be anything but wives? I'm getting so bored with the argument that women have had no power in the church and that until they get the priesthood, we have to pretend that it Hayes women. The priesthood is not about power, it's about service, but that is never the emphasis of the argument. Until it is, i am not buying. I am not interested in priests who are sly and talk around issues and that is what I see Chittester, Campbell, Farrell and the rest doing.
8.7.2012 | 12:42pm
LisaB says:
Elizabeth,
Welcome back & beautifully written post, that is how I always understood that passage. Somewhere scribbled in my bible are the words "faith activates God," and it's a mantra that I often repeat when spiritually floundering because faith is not a passive activity. The woman in the passage opened the door for Jesus.
8.7.2012 | 1:21pm
Jen says:
This was wonderful to read, Elizabeth. A great perspective. When I was young I was a little bothered by Jesus' reaction to the woman, but thank the Lord, I came to understand what He was really doing FOR her in that exchange. Jesus, who knows each of us intimately and personally, KNEW this woman and what she was capable of, and what she needed. He gave her a gift by compelling her to speak up and be bold. He was affirming her in the most powerful way. He called out her dignity and worth as His daughter and made it public for all to see. I have also envisioned Him trying to hide His smile from her just until she made her final plea and then letting go with a deep and proud cheer!
8.7.2012 | 3:10pm
Elaine T says:
I've read a commentary on the scene with Jesus & the woman that points out the other element in the picture: the disciples. The claim there was that Jesus was teaching his disciples by putting into word and action towards a hurting human being the beliefs they hold. In other words, they were prejudiced against women and Canaanites, Jesus showed them what it looked like in action and then what they should replace those bad behaviors with. I'd never though of it in those terms before, but it made sense as Bailey laid it out.

Bailey also points out similarities between this story and the story of Elijah and the widow & her son.

The woman acknowledges who He is right away, she calls him Son of David, which is (I gather) a very Jewish appellation, not something to be expected from a Canaanite.

This story has nothing to do with women as priests. I've been holding a parish Bible study for some years now, and one thing I've noticed in the OT is that God is really firm on who can be ordained priests - it's not just anybody, and it is not just that something thinks they can be one. God chooses. While God chooses women for some things, I haven't found Him ever choosing a female for priest. It's not just cultural baggage, it seems to go back to the roots of things and the differences between men and women and God's revelation as Father.
8.7.2012 | 3:34pm
Mary says:
Some of the comments have me reeling. The Church "rethinking" ordination of women; Jesus changing His mind. Jesus has two natures in one Divine Person. Jesus continually challenges us to take off the sin of pride which was also the sin of our first parents and the paramount sin of today. The need for Catholics to disobey (as in the LCWR) and others to condemn magisterial teaching (as in gay activists) is nothing more than putting on pride. When we approach God as humble children He loves us all the more (as if that was even possible). Think about the Pharisee who was chastised for saying, "I'm glad that I am not like the rest of them" and the repentant sinner who said, "Lord have mercy on me a poor sinner".
8.7.2012 | 5:15pm
mag says:
"Is any part of God subordinate to another? "

The Son is subordinate to the Father. "The Father is greater than I," John 14:28.
8.7.2012 | 6:06pm
Margaret says:
Another possible interpretation of the story of the Canaanite woman is that it demonstrates how to pray: we should do so often and sincerely...don't give up...ask and you shall receive (eventually if not right away). Other episodes of the New Testament also stress persistence in prayer. For example, the parable of the Importunate Neighbor, who annoyed his friend in the middle of the night asking for bread (Luke 11:5-10) and the parable of the Unjust Judge, pestered into action by the widow (Luke 18:1-8). Alright already, says God!

The unexpected element of suspense and the barbed dialog makes the incident memorable, not just to those accompanying Jesus but also to us. Like Jen, I was bothered by this story when I was a child. It stuck in my mind, and I have thus pondered it for decades. As an adult, I realize the treasure in these mysterious and difficult readings. What a great teaching technique.
8.7.2012 | 7:36pm
Mick Leahy says:
Thanks Mary,
Great post, you said what needed to be said, there was some extraordinary heresy in some of these previous posts.
8.7.2012 | 8:13pm
Don Roberto says:
Yes, humility is key. May His amazing grace also save me, a wretch. (A dog is more worthy than a wretch, insofar as it is innocent of sin.) †
8.7.2012 | 8:29pm
Stan Beck says:
David J. White, give it a rest. I think that the omnipresent and omnipotent Lord would know what the translation would be into English, a yet uncreated language, or may have influenced the English translators.

The wonderful passage "Ask and it shall be given. Seek and you shall find. Knock and the door shall be opened." has an interesting coincidence also. (A)sk (S)eek (K)nock. Add the first letters together and you get (ASK).

Another is the use of the term Talents in Matthew 25:14-30. In the parable they are used in the monetary value. But in English they could represent the gifts that God has given us. We are encouraged to invest these "talents" by using them in the work of the Lord. When we do, we gain more. But if we hid them instead, they are taken from us and given to those using theirs. Again, God knows what is and always will be and shows us his power in the two ways of reading this parable.
8.7.2012 | 9:49pm
Patsy says:
I dunno... being single and all, I'd rather like to be a fisher of MEN. Just one good man would do, though ;-)
8.8.2012 | 12:05pm
David J. White, give it a rest. I think that the omnipresent and omnipotent Lord would know what the translation would be into English, a yet uncreated language, or may have influenced the English translators.

I'm sorry, Stan, but I've run into too many people who seem to think that *The Bible* (capital T, capital B) is the King James Version, which of course was handed down from Heaven in toto, printed and bound, with the words of Christ in red. If English was good enough for Jesus, it should be good enough for everyone else, by gum!

Yes, translation is an art, not a science, and translations can be works of art in themselves. (The KJV certainly is.) But making theological arguments on the basis of translations -- which the Church have never asserted should be regarded as inspired in the way that the original texts were -- is simply bad scholarly practice. A translation is always an interpretation, and at one remove, at least, from the original text.

Yes, the "fishermen ... fishers of men" turn of phrase is clever. It's the cleverness of the translators. Again, translations can be works of art in themselves. But it's not in the original text.

If students of mine based a literary or historical argument on a translation rather than on an original text, when they should know better, that's a good way to get a failing grade. "Plato said X." No, Plato did not say "X". The particular translation of Plato that you're using says "X".
8.8.2012 | 7:50pm
Mike says:
Thanks for the exegesis, I had not thought of that aspect. The take away for me is that the woman loved her daughter enough not to be deterred by cultural attitudes. Jesus is the same way.
8.9.2012 | 12:42am
Nan says:
@Frank Pray. You're missing a couple of things; first, Jesus goes up the mount to pray with his father. When he returns he calls the 12 to him and names them apostles. All men. The women were around. If he wanted to include them, he could've chosen to do so. Second, the priest stands in persona christi. In order to stand in persona christi, one must be the same sort of person as Christ. Christ was incarnate man.

I do agree with those who say that the women wanting to be priests are all about power; look at the popes, including our current Holy Father. He didn't want to go to Rome to begin with. God calls those he wants to the priesthood and many are reluctant to heed that call.
8.9.2012 | 1:40am
Stan Beck says:
David J. White, thank you for taking my comment in the way I intended. I may not be a scholar but I am a believer and if I could sit down with you and tell you some of the small miracles that have happened in my life since I finally came to the Lord you may realize why I am not surprised at what can be found in the Bible. This is a belief, a faith. there are things here that cannot be quantified by scholarship. If it could be then it would all be ashes.
8.12.2012 | 3:45pm
T says:
David J. White @8:14 Am wrote:

"'fishers ... I will make you fishers of human beings'".

The pun still works even if the translation isn't linguistic because it is rooted in the idea. "Fishers" Fishers of what? Of Donuts? No fishers OF FISH. Fishers (of fish) become fishers of human beings.
type the text above in the box below

Links

Blogs

Find Us

Contact