Robert Barron - Chosen for the Sake of the World
Peace be with you. Friends, our Gospel today is from Matthew chapter 15, the famous story of Jesus and the Syrophoenician woman. Now, I've found in my years of preaching, this is one of those Gospels that bothers people. They come up to you afterwards, and even after your homily, which you think has cleared up every question; they still say, "Look, I don't get it. This Gospel unnerves me". You know the story, where Jesus is up now in this region of Tyre and Sidon. So it would be just outside of the borders of Israel. And he comes across this Canaanite woman, and she cries out to him, "Have pity on me, Lord, Son of David! My daughter is tormented by a demon".
Now normally, Jesus, "Okay, I will act, I will do something," he responds. Well, this one, there's such a sort of off-putting quality, right? So Jesus first did not say a word in answer to her. Now, can you imagine, someone comes up to you and asks a favor and you don't even say, "I'm sorry," or, "I can't do it right now"? You don't even say a word to her. And then the disciples come, so Jesus' entourage. They kind of get on her case, and they ask to send her away. And she keeps persisting. And Jesus says, "No, no, I've been sent to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, not to women such as this".
And then when she keeps persisting, what does he say? And it's one of the harshest things, it seems, that he says in the Gospels: "It is not right to take the food of the children and throw it to the dogs". So here's this woman who's in great need. She's asking, mind you, not for herself but for her daughter. She's come in faith, it seems, to Jesus, calling him the Son of David, and she's just put off again and again. And then she has one of the great comeback one-liners in the Gospels: "Please, Lord, for even the dogs eat the scraps that fall from the table of their masters". At this point, Jesus says, "Okay, I will do what you ask because your faith is great".
Well, you can see why this bothers people. Here's Jesus, the sinless Christ, and he seems to be pretty grouchy, pretty grumpy. His disciples, we're used to them being a little bit obnoxious; but Jesus himself? And then to throw this line into the face of this woman who's in great need and calling her a dog, essentially? What do we make of this? Okay, can I tell you first of all how not to read this story. Even though I heard growing up probably a hundred homilies along this line, this is not the way to read it.
Well, poor Jesus had a tough day of ministry and he was grumpy and grouchy at the end of the day, tired, probably hungry. And this woman comes up and she's pestering him. And so he kind of snaps at her. It shows his humanity and it shows his limitations. And then this plucky Syrophoenician woman, she hangs in there and she speaks truth to power. And so then she shows how clever she is and she gets what she wants. Please, everybody, that's not how to read this story.
See, problem number one with that is, say what you want, it turns Jesus into a sinner. And we can't have the sinless Son of God being a sinner. Even to say, "Oh, he's grumpy and grouchy after a long day's work". Still, I don't care how grumpy and grouchy I am, if at the end of the day I start snapping at people and calling them names, well, that's a sin. So we can't interpret this story as though Jesus becomes the sinner, because the minute Jesus becomes the sinner, he's not the Savior.
So this is a serious problem. So let's get rid of that interpretation. I think we're meant to read this in a much more subtle way. It's driving at an issue which is very central to the Bible. It's the issue of the relationship between Israel and the other nations. Israel and the other nations. Is Israel the special chosen people of God? Yes. Yes. Well, I guess that means the other nations are kindnof in the outer darkness? No. Israel has been chosen for the sake of the nations.
See, that's the principle. And this is a good example of a New Testament instantiation of that principle. Go right back, everybody, to the very beginning of the Bible when God creates the heavens and the earth. There's no Israel at that time. There's God creating all that is. God's salvific purpose has to do not just with Israel. It has to do with the whole universe. More to it, think of those opening stories and Noah, for example. Noah's not an Israelite. There's no Israel at the time of Noah. But yet God is concerned for him. God's concern is with all of his creation and with all of humanity.
Now, what's the means? It's very important, everybody. It's very important to get this because a lot hinges in the Bible upon this. What's the means that God chose to deal with his whole creation and all of humanity? The means chosen is the formation of a particular people, Israel. So beginning with Abraham, remember the call of Abraham, and then from him Isaac and Jacob, and then to Moses and Joshua and Saul and David. We have the temple, we have Torah, we have covenant, we have prophecy. We have all the institutions of Israel.
What was the purpose of all of that? It was to form a holy people according to God's mind and heart, who would then draw to themselves all the nations of the world. Or shift the metaphor, from that central place would go out God's good order so as to bring all the world into union with the creator God. Israel's chosen, yes. They're the special people. But they're not chosen for themselves. They're chosen for the sake of the world. Once you get that, it's like a key that unlocks all kinds of doors in the Bible. You begin to understand the vocation of Israel.
Now, I'm dating myself here. There's an old album by John Lennon back in the seventies. It's called "Walls and Bridges". I've always liked that phrase, "walls and bridges," because you know what, everybody, you need both. What do walls do? Walls define. They set something apart. They include and they exclude, right? You put a wall around something, you're saying it's this. It's this identity, and it's not things outside. Walls define. Is there a great wall around Israel? Yes, all through the Old Testament. Go back to the book of Leviticus, the book of Numbers, much of the book of Exodus. Look at the prescriptions of the Law.
Look at the practice of the temple. What was all that meant to do? It was meant to circumscribe this particular people. They were not to be like the other nations, because if they just became like the other nations, they'd lose their integrity, and then they would not be able to bring anything to the wider world. If the walls of Jerusalem were breached and in came all the other cultures with their false worship and their bad moral practice and so on, Israel would lose its soul. And if Israel lost its soul, then the hope of salvation for the whole world would be lost. Therefore, by God, we need walls. Israel needed walls. It needed definition. But remember, walls and bridges.
Finally, having been defined adequately, Israel now constructs a bridge so as to bring its life out into the wider world. I've used the image before of Noah's ark, that something was preserved within the walls of Noah's ark. Look, if there were no walls on that ship, it would've sunk, period, and everything on it would've been lost. The walls defined Noah's ark. But then, then, once the floodwaters receded, the life was let out. That's the biblical rhythm.
Now go back to this story with all of that in mind. This is not Jesus having a hard day and a plucky lady talking back to him. That's a modern imposition. What are we seeing here but, on vivid narrative display, the very principles I've been talking about. What is the point of this kind of off-putting move by Jesus and the Apostles? It's a kind of acting out, if you will, of the fact of the walls. It's a statement of the definition of Israel. "I have come for the lost sheep of the house of Israel".
That's the opening move, that Israel must have its own definition. But see, how does the story end? It doesn't end there with Israel simply exalting in its distinctiveness. No, finally, and how beautiful; this woman is a beautiful figure in the New Testament because she represents all the nations of the world who are sensing the beauty and integrity of Israel and are seeking life from it. She's there, as it were, at the wall, saying, "Please, I want what you have".
And at the end of the day in this story, Jesus, who had first emphasized the wall quality, now establishes the bridge. Her faith becomes a bridge from her side. His mercy becomes a bridge from the other side. And now something of the grace and life of Israel goes out to the wider world. So that's why she's a beautiful symbol, not of a plucky, clever gal; she's a symbol of the nations, of the Church, which has received through this bridge of Christ the life and grace of Israel.
Let me just close with this, lest you say, "Okay, well, that's all very interesting biblical interpretation". But see, everybody, it's all about us. I think of in my own life how many graces I received, to be born into the family I was born into. My parents, wonderful devout Catholics, sent me to Catholic school for my formation, to Mass every Sunday; I was exposed to the best of the Catholic intellectual and artistic tradition and all of these wonderful things that were given to me. It's a grace. I didn't earn them. I didn't achieve them. They were kind of given to me as a grace. Why?
That I might just rest in them and say, "Aren't I a nice boy because I've got these special gifts"? No, no, no. I see as my own life has unfolded, the whole point of that was that I might then be able to share what I was given to the wider world, which I'm doing right now through this camera in front of me, which is functioning as a kind of bridge to the nations. But again, remember, remember, unless there were walls at one point in my life, unless something had been defined for me, I'd have nothing substantial to give.
See, in some ways the liberal-conservative battle, I know it's complex, but one way to look at it is it comes down to this. Are you more of a walls person or more of a bridges person? So liberals tend to be all about bridges, looking out to the wider world and establishing connection and contact. Well, great. I love bridges. But bridges are useless unless they've been preceded by something like a wall. Because if all I'm doing is establishing contact with the wider world, then I can just become, the wider world. I can lose my distinctiveness. Or if I'm a conservative and I say, "Look, I'm all about walls. I'm all about defining who we are as Catholics".
Well, great, I'm for that too. But then if that's all I have, I'm just going to crouch defensively behind those high walls, and I will not fulfill the mission of the Church, which is finally to build a bridge from that beautiful community to the wider world. Can I suggest, everybody, that's the right theoretical or theological framework for reading this marvelous story from Matthew 15. Both walls and bridges; both a defined Israel and a missionary Israel. That's the proper nature of the Church. And God bless you.