The case of the poor mother was a pathetic one, and would naturally awaken the sympathies of the tender-hearted. But the Great Prophet of the kingdom of God could not be swayed by sentiment or emotion merely, and thrown from His just balance in the administration of the mercy of Jehovah. In Him mercy was perfectly tempered with truth and righteousness, as was the case with none other of the servants of God. Jonah, that former prophet of Galilee, knew neither mercy nor grace, and repined in his bigotry, at the forbearance of God shown to the Ninevites who repented at his preaching. Though he had himself experienced how Jehovah's power and mercy miraculously delivered a disobedient servant from a just retribution, Jonah could not endure that the ignorant Gentiles unable to “discern between their right hand and their left hand” should be spared from the threatened judgment. But Jesus, while full of compassion for the stranger, was equally full of truth as of grace. His mercy, “the sure mercies of David,” was exercised according to the inflexible truth of God. Bounds were set to the flow of the living waters. Jehovah had for many centuries drawn broad and deep distinctions among the families of mankind, based upon His promise and His oath. In Abraham the olive tree of promise was established, and successive prophets had declared that his seed were the appointed participants in its “root and fatness.”
According to the oracles of truth, therefore, the seed of Abraham were the chosen people of God, and nationally were brought into filial relationship with Him. “Out of Egypt I have called my son,” said Jehovah, carrying the nation out of the house of bondage into the land of plenty, the “land flowing with milk and honey.” Because of their gross idolatry and moral depravity, the aboriginal inhabitants of Canaan were driven out to make place for those known in prophetic language as “sons of the living God.”
Dispensationally, therefore, as the whole scheme of Old Testament promise and prophecy showed, the descendants of Israel were nearer God than the Gentiles. And the Lord Jesus in His ministry of the abundant grace of God recognized the divine restrictions imposed in former days. He had not come to destroy the law and the prophets (Matt. 5:1717Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. (Matthew 5:17)); and what God had established He would not permit man to waive or ignore. Even in this case of dire extremity, the woman was not entitled by reason of her necessity to set aside the ruling and ways of God for centuries. The Messiah was sent to Israel, and salvation was of the Jews. She must learn that her only hope lay in the sovereign mercy of God.
The question involved in the woman's plea, therefore, was one of proper decorum in approaching the Majesty of heavenly grace. Seemliness in the eyes of heaven is the due recognition of the dignity and authority of what is of God. Distinctions must not be set aside save by the One who made those distinctions. Soon it would be declared of human depravity that “there is no difference; for all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God"; and further, of divine sovereignty, “there is no difference, for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him” (Rom. 3:23; 10:1223For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; (Romans 3:23)
12For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. (Romans 10:12)).
But in the days of our Lord's ministry, there were still those who nationally were of the family of God and those who were not. In relative dispensational position, therefore, the two classes were as far removed from one another in the household as children and dogs. Hence the Lord said to the woman, “Let the children first be filled; it is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to the dogs.”
In this reply, the Lord, as it were, appealed to what was in harmony with divine appointment in the matter of government among men. When the order of the coming heavenly kingdom is fully established upon the earth, there will then be a class who have a right to eat of the tree of life, and to enter through the gates into the city: there will at the same time be “dogs,” but these are said to be “without” (Rev. 22:1515For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie. (Revelation 22:15)).
The words of our Lord challenged the woman whether she would accept these limitations imposed by God in the course of His sovereign dealings with men. The divine decree to Joshua was that the Canaanite should be exterminated from the land, and now the anointed King in that land had used to her a term of reproach which seemed to be harsh and humiliating. What would she do? In her self-abasement, she accepted the term in its full religious import. She could not claim to be a child, and she did not refuse to acknowledge herself before the Lord and His disciples to be an unclean dog. The word of truth had truly entered her soul, and cast out all Gentile pride, convincing her that by race she was an outcast from Israel, and therefore without any prescriptive claim upon the Messiah of that nation.
THE WOMAN'S SAYING OF FAITH
The woman's reply to our Lord indicated what was in her heart. She did not dispute His word that the children had a prior claim and should first be filled, nor that it would be unseemly to cast the children's bread to the dogs. Outward appearances at that time seemed to suggest that the relative position of the two races was the reverse, for the Jew was under the yoke of the Gentile. Nevertheless, the suppliant owned that Israel was the people of God, as Rahab, another Gentile woman, by a similar faith, had done at an earlier day (Heb. 11:3131By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. (Hebrews 11:31)).
But the faith of this stranger went a step farther. She believed the prophet's word that the seed of Abraham were “children” in the sense of Ex. 4:2222And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, Thus saith the Lord, Israel is my son, even my firstborn: (Exodus 4:22); Hos. 1:10; 11:110Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. (Hosea 1:10)
1When Israel was a child, then I loved him, and called my son out of Egypt. (Hosea 11:1); but she also trusted God and His messenger to whom she had come that somehow there would be help for her and her daughter, in spite of her gentile extraction.
From whence did her faith arise? It is written that she had “heard of him;” and “faith cometh by hearing.” The news she heard of the Lord brought her to His feet in supplication. Then His word to her, molding and correcting the terms of her request, further developed the faith of her heart which, like Jacob of old (Gen. 32:2626And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me. (Genesis 32:26)), would not part with Him without His blessing.
The Lord described the woman's faith as “great” (Matt. 15:2525Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. (Matthew 15:25)), and there is but one other instance besides recorded in the Gospels, which He similarly characterized—that of the Roman centurion (Matt. 8:1010When Jesus heard it, he marvelled, and said to them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. (Matthew 8:10); Luke 7:99When Jesus heard these things, he marvelled at him, and turned him about, and said unto the people that followed him, I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. (Luke 7:9)). And it is noteworthy that the same Discerner of hearts who pronounced the faith of these two Gentiles to be “great” declared that of the disciples and that of Peter to be “little” (Matt. 8:26; 14:3126And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm. (Matthew 8:26)
31And immediately Jesus stretched forth his hand, and caught him, and said unto him, O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? (Matthew 14:31)).
“Great” faith appears to have grown out of a sense which these two believers had of the illimitable (1) power and (2) grace of Jesus. The two Gentile claimants freely acknowledged their personal unworthiness, but their “great” faith did not consist of their humility. Each presented to the Lord with much fervor a case of great urgency, but their faith did not become great in proportion to the importunity of their petitions. In addition, however, to lowliness of spirit and earnest appeal, they both placed themselves unreservedly in the hands of the Great Benefactor. In other words, they showed unrestricted confidence in His will, acting in His love, to help and heal. Such faith the Lord had not found in Israel, for they said to Him, “What doest thou for a sign that we may see and believe thee?” (John 6:3030They said therefore unto him, What sign showest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work? (John 6:30))
There appear at the same time to be differences between the cases. The centurion trusted the power of Jesus, especially in His capacity as the administrator of the Kingdom of God. He did not at all expect the Lord to come beneath the roof of a Gentile; indeed he did not consider that His bodily presence was essential. The Master needed only, as he said, to utter the word of command, and his servant would be healed (cp. Psa. 107:2020He sent his word, and healed them, and delivered them from their destructions. (Psalm 107:20)). These expressions of the Roman officer showed his absolute confidence in the supreme power wielded by the Nazarene; and the Lord recognized this when He said, “I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel.”
In the second instance, the woman of Canaan expressed her confidence, not so much in the fullness of the authority as in the over-flowing goodness and bounty of Jesus. The Master who had prepared a table for the children of the kingdom did so, she believed, with a lavishness worthy of the God of heaven. The Messiah had come to fill the hungry with good things. At His feast there was ample provision for all. And while it was not meet that bread should be withdrawn from the children and thrown to the dogs, there were fragments from the feast that remained, crumbs that fell from the table loaded with the Master's benefits, portions of the plenty unneeded, neglected, despised by the rightful guests. Of these fragments, the dogs of the household under the table might surely, she pleaded, be permitted to eat with freedom, though indeed Lazarus desired in vain those that fell from the table of Dives (Luke 16:2121And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. (Luke 16:21)).
As a Gentile stranger, she could not claim a chief seat at the feast, nor indeed could she claim a seat as guest at all. Nor, to anticipate the apostolic figure, had she, as of the wild olive, any desire to “boast herself against the branches” (Rom. 11:1818Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee. (Romans 11:18)), but in singular and appropriate humility she abased herself to a dog's place beneath the table that there she might be authorized by the Master to partake of the crumbs of heavenly mercy. Thus, humbling herself to the lowest, but clinging ever to the All-highest, she became to the Lord's eyes “great in faith,” giving glory to God.
HER PERSEVERANCE IN PRAYER
The pertinacity of the woman in presenting her requests is marked in the narratives of both Matthew and Mark, and she affords a striking example of that continuance in prayer to which the apostle of the Gentiles exhorts the church at Colosse (Col. 4:22Continue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving; (Colossians 4:2)).
The persevering suit of the woman was based, as indeed all real believing prayer must be upon a sense of the love and grace of God revealed in His Son. This active cause is brought out in the following quotation (slightly abridged).
“Need and faith in the goodness and power of the Lord give perseverance, as in the case of those who carried the paralytic man when the crowd pressed around Jesus (Mark 2:3-53And they come unto him, bringing one sick of the palsy, which was borne of four. 4And when they could not come nigh unto him for the press, they uncovered the roof where he was: and when they had broken it up, they let down the bed wherein the sick of the palsy lay. 5When Jesus saw their faith, he said unto the sick of the palsy, Son, thy sins be forgiven thee. (Mark 2:3‑5)). But there is something in the woman's heart beside confidence, which grace had produced there. She recognizes the rights of the Jews as God's people; she owns that she is but a dog with regard to them: but she insists upon her demand, because she feels that, even though she be but a dog, the grace of God is sufficient for those who had no rights. 'Even the dogs,' she says, ‘eat of the children's crumbs.'
“She believes in God's love towards those who have neither rights nor promises; and in the manifestation of God in Jesus outside of, and above, all dispensations. God is good, and the fact of a person being in misery is a claim with Him. Could Christ say to her, No, God is not good as thou dost suppose? He could not say this: it would not have been the truth.
“This is great faith, faith which recognizes our own wretchedness, and that we have a right to nothing, but which believes in the love of God clearly revealed in Jesus. We have no right to expect the exercise of this love towards us, but we can be sure that coming to Christ, impelled by our wants, we shall find perfect goodness, love that heals us, and the healing itself.
“Let us remember that true need perseveres because it cannot do without the aid of the power which was manifested in Christ, nor without the salvation which He brought; nor is there salvation without the help which is to be found in Him for our weakness. And that which is in God is the source of our hope and of our faith; and if asked how we know what is in God's heart, we can answer, 'It is perfectly revealed in Christ.' Who put it into God's heart to send His own Son to save us? Who put it into the Son's heart to come and suffer everything for us? Not man. God's heart is its source. We believe in this love.
“The grace of God was fully shown forth towards the poor woman, who had no right to any blessing, nor to any promise; she was a daughter of the accursed Canaan; but faith reaches even to the heart of God manifested in Jesus, and in like manner the eye of God reaches to the bottom of man's heart. Thus God's heart and man's heart meet, in the consciousness that man is altogether bad, that he has not a single right; indeed he owns truly this state, and gives himself up to the perfect goodness of God. But the Jewish people, who pretended to possess righteousness and right to the promises is set on one side; and, as to the old covenant, is shut out from God's favor."
FEATURES PECULIAR TO MATTHEW
A comparison of the terms in which this incident is recounted by Matthew and Mark respectively, affords illustration of the distinct purposes of the two Evangelists in their histories. Mark, who presents Jesus as the Great Servant-Prophet of Jehovah, executing His earthly commission with unexampled perfection and grace of manner, shows Him in the outskirts of Immanuel's land, feeding the Syro-phoenician woman with the “bread of heaven.” Mark's account is briefer than the companion one, but sufficient to excite our adoring wonder at the readiness of the Lord to take up His active service even when the Gentile stranger sought His presence in the house where He “would have no man know it.” This prophet's kindness to the woman who came out of the borders of Tire and Sidon recalls the mission of Elijah to the widow of Zarephath, a city of Zidon. In the days of famine she was preserved from starvation by the power and mercy of Jehovah through the prophet, though she was a Gentile and not a widow in Israel (1 Kings 17:8-168And the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, 9Arise, get thee to Zarephath, which belongeth to Zidon, and dwell there: behold, I have commanded a widow woman there to sustain thee. 10So he arose and went to Zarephath. And when he came to the gate of the city, behold, the widow woman was there gathering of sticks: and he called to her, and said, Fetch me, I pray thee, a little water in a vessel, that I may drink. 11And as she was going to fetch it, he called to her, and said, Bring me, I pray thee, a morsel of bread in thine hand. 12And she said, As the Lord thy God liveth, I have not a cake, but an handful of meal in a barrel, and a little oil in a cruse: and, behold, I am gathering two sticks, that I may go in and dress it for me and my son, that we may eat it, and die. 13And Elijah said unto her, Fear not; go and do as thou hast said: but make me thereof a little cake first, and bring it unto me, and after make for thee and for thy son. 14For thus saith the Lord God of Israel, The barrel of meal shall not waste, neither shall the cruse of oil fail, until the day that the Lord sendeth rain upon the earth. 15And she went and did according to the saying of Elijah: and she, and he, and her house, did eat many days. 16And the barrel of meal wasted not, neither did the cruse of oil fail, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by Elijah. (1 Kings 17:8‑16); Luke 4:2626But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow. (Luke 4:26)).
The principal points which appear only in the account by Matthew, and which illustrate His regal demeanor, are as follows:-
(1) The woman addressed the Lord as Son of David.
(2) The Lord remained silent at first.
(3) The disciples in the Jewish spirit of exclusiveness desired that she might be sent away.
(4) The Lord made reference to His mission to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
(5) The Lord commended the greatness of the woman's faith.
The first Gospel presents Jesus especially as of the Royal House of David, and its first verse reads: “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.”
As the Old Testament records those who confessed the fugitive David to be the anointed king of Israel (2 Sam. 23, et alia), so Matthew most fully of the four Evangelists records those who owned Jesus of Nazareth to be the Son of David. There are six such instances:-
(1) two blind men in Galilee (9:27);
(2) the multitude in Galilee (12:23);
(3) the woman of Canaan (15:22);
(4) two blind men near Jericho (20:30, 31);
(5) the multitude at the entrance to Jerusalem (21:9);
(6) the children in the temple (21:15).
But the Pharisees will not own Him either as David's Son or David's Lord (22:41-46). There are three Gentile women named in the genealogy of the Royal Child, viz., Tamar, Rahab and Ruth (1:3, 4, 5), and one other is honorably mentioned, though not by name (12:22), among the few who hailed the Nazarene as the Son of David.
Though the Lord remained silent, was not this confession sweet to Him, though coming from the mouth of a Gentile? He was in the territory of the tribe of Asher, of whom Jacob prophesied, “He shall yield royal dainties” (Gen. 49:2020Out of Asher his bread shall be fat, and he shall yield royal dainties. (Genesis 49:20)). So although there was no table in Zion for David's Son, there was one spread in the wilderness of Asher, where He had royal dainties to eat that Israel knew not of, and where there were crumbs of grace for hungry Gentiles too.
W. J. H.
(To be continued)