All One in Christ Jesus: A Goal of Complete Equality

*This is a featured article by guest author Jake Waehner, Graduate of Roberts Wesleyan College*

Among the most powerful and radical verses in the Bible is Galatians 3:28. “There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus” (NRSV). This verse is likely the most progressive verse to be found in the entire Bible, and is seemingly contradictory to other statements made by the Apostle Paul throughout his letters through the early churches; some of the seemingly most misogynistic and oppressive statements in the Bible are contained in his letters. Even today, these statements are used to oppress women in the church. Many churches (perhaps even the majority of the Christian circles of the world) still do not reflect the radical equality described in Galatians 3:28, while upholding an interpretation of Scripture that holds women, and the Church as a whole by extension, back.

It is important to see that while Scripture does contain verses that would be considered misogynistic and oppressive to women today, they were actually quite progressive in the first century. Galatians 3:28 represents the trajectory found in the Bible of complete and radical inclusion of all people without preference or discrimination. How does one then justify this trajectory throughout Scripture, and what does a community that reflects Galatians 3:28 look like? Additionally, what changes need to be made in modern Christianity in order to attain this goal? The most important issues at hand is the need for a change in worldview that leads to a radical restructuring of the worldwide Church so that it can be a force for empowerment and progressive change, rather than an anchor holding society back or a global force for oppression of women.

Throughout the Bible, it is evident that the end goal is complete equality. In Genesis 1:26-27, it says that both male and female were made in the image of God. There is nothing in the first chapter to suggest that women were meant to be submissive to men. However, in the second chapter, there is argument that when the woman is designated ezer in Genesis 2:18 that this leaves the male to be the one in the leadership position. However, this cannot be true because God is an ezer in verses such as Exodus 18:4, as well as in Deuteronomy 33 and throughout the book of Psalms. The first time that the women is told to be submissive to the man is in Genesis 3:16 as a result of the curse that brings about the fall of humanity. The patriarchy, then, is a result of the fall, and is something that society needs to actively work against in order to bring about the world that was originally intended by God before a morally corruptible human nature caused sin to distort the social hierarchy. In other words, patriarchy and the subjugation of women is a literal curse on humanity.

After the fall in Genesis 3, there are countless examples of violence and oppression against women. Common examples of these aggressions include the use of concubines, such as Abram’s use of Sarai’s maidservant Hagar in Genesis 16, which is later justified by the law throughout the Pentateuch.  Laws in Exodus chapters 20 and 21 outline how daughters can be sold like slaves, except that female slaves do not get freed after six years like male slaves do. In the Old Testament, women are entirely dependent on men as outlined in Genesis 3. If a married man divorces his wife (which he is allowed to do per Deuteronomy 24:1-4), the woman’s life is essentially ruined; she has no husband to support her and her family will not take her back. She has no rights to property, because she is the property of either her husband or her father. An especially gruesome law is found in Numbers 5:11-31 in which a man who suspects his wife of committing adultery (an offense only a woman could commit in the Old Testament), or is simply feeling particularly jealous that day, is allowed to make a women drink cursed water that will “cause bitter pain, and her womb shall discharge, her uterus drop, and the woman shall become an execration among her people” (Numbers 5:27 NRSV) if she had committed adultery.

It is clear that Old Testament Law is oppressive towards women, but it is apparent that Old Testament society, while still oppressive, contains examples of strong females who subvert the laws to do good for their society. An obvious example is Deborah, the prophetess and judge who lead Israel into battle with Barak, who refused to go unless Deborah went as well. Her prophecy in Judges 4:9, in which she tells Barak “the road on which you are going will not lead to your glory, for the  Lord will sell Sisera into the hand of a woman” comes true not through Deborah, but Jael, another woman who drove a tent peg through the general Sisera’s temple as he slept. Another story of female empowerment is the story of Abigail in 1 Samuel 25, in which she takes over her household in her husband Nabal’s drunken ineptitude and saves hundreds of people put in danger by his foolishness. Even though the laws in the Old Testament were stacked against them, there is a vein of strong women in the narrative who still do righteous and important things.

In the New Testament, there is a still greater movement towards gender equality. Jesus allowed Mary, Martha’s sister, to study under him in Luke 10:38-42, which was unheard of in Jesus’s society. He even praises Mary’s choice to study rather than to conform to traditional gender roles, saying in verse 42 that “Mary has chosen the better part.” The story in John chapter 4 of the woman at the well is often told as a condemnation for sexual promiscuity, but when Jesus commented on the number of husbands that she has had, he is not saying that the Samaritan woman was a sexual sinner. He was disclosing to the woman that he had divine knowledge, but more importantly, he was condemning the patriarchal system that had failed her. These husbands had left her for dead; Jesus condemns this system of divorce in the Sermon on The Mount (Matthew 5:31-32). The Samaritan woman then becomes the first evangelist, causing her whole village to believe.

While the Apostle Paul might have said things in his epistles that seem misogynistic to modern readers, his writings suggests a worldview that is a continuation of this movement towards equality seen throughout the Bible since the fall. In Romans 16, Paul refers to Phoebe as a deaconess, and to Junia as an Apostle. While he seems to condemn women in leadership in I Timothy, it is apparent that the situation is not so explicitly clear. In other letters, Paul refers to women who are in leadership, like Romans 16. The Christian church offered an unprecedented inclusion of women that was part of the reason that the church was successful despite the persecution it faced. One of Paul’s most powerful points comes in Galatians 3:28 in which he lays out the end goal for a Christian society: equality for all people regardless of status, nationality, or gender.

(Photo credit to Transforming Christianity)

It is apparent, then, that feminism is compatible with the Bible, and anything less than full equality between genders is a moral failure. However, it is also apparent that the church, as well as society in general has fallen short of this goal. Feminist theologian Mary Daly said that “the reformed, democratized Church of the future is not yet here, although the seeds of it are present in the living faith, hope and courage of the Christian community.”1 Daly’s first book, The Church and the Second Sex, contains a message of hope despite the rampant patriarchy in the church. In many denominations, women do not have the right to serve in ministry. Additionally, traditional gender roles are still held by many Christians. Complementarianism is a conservative response to feminism that reinforces gender roles by asserting that some roles are for women and others for men.2 However, even though many complementarians assert that these roles are separate but equal, it is obvious that there is a hierarchy implied. The male roles include the authority to decide what the female roles are, and none of the female roles are exclusively female like the male roles are.3 Even in secular society, casual sexism is still pervasive. The church should be a leading force for equality throughout the world, but it is unfortunately holding society back. Even among feminists, full equality is difficult to attain. It is important for feminism to be intersectional. Women of color, LGBTQ+ women, and women of disabilities are just a few groups of women who will inevitably face more and different forms of oppression than a heterosexual, cisgender white woman.4 This often causes conflict within feminism. It is important that all women work together for their common good while acknowledging their differences in solidarity.5

The Episcopal Church is one of the most progressive churches in the United States. In addition to their LGBTQ+ inclusion in recent years, women have been able to be ordained for the past four decades.6 They acknowledge that women are created in the image of God and that they too are called to ministerial roles like men are.7 In a statement to the United Nations, the Episcopal church said “Episcopalians have published, studied, gathered, advocated and campaigned on gender discrimination, domestic and gender violence, sex trafficking, gender budgeting, election advocacy, word studies, and gender parity, both within our Church and at the United Nations.”8 There is an emphasis on women’s issues in this denomination, and many women serve in high ranking positions in the church. The last Presiding Bishop, the leader of the Episcopal Church, was Katherine Jefferts Schori, who was the first female leader of a denomination in the Anglican Communion.9 St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church in Olean, NY is led by the Reverend Kim Rossi today, but when women were first allowed to serve in ministry in the denomination, this parish had a different opinion. “The Rector of St. Stephen’s Church at that time, The Rev. Richard Duncan, flew the Episcopal Flag upside down and at half mast when the church approved the ordination of women.”10 However, in the span of a few decades, a woman rose to the highest position in the denomination. Additionally, the Episcopal Church has recognized the intersectional struggles of women who are also part of other oppressed groups. The Episcopal Church has come a long way in the path towards a Galatians 3:28 society, but there is still work to do in order to end sexism in the world.11

If the church is going to become a fully equal place, there needs to be sweeping changes not only in practice and doctrine but also in the mindsets of the people in the church. Sexism is something that has become socially omnipresent, so it needs to be consciously unlearned. If the church was able to unlearn sexism, it could become a safe place for women and a powerful force for equality. However, in order to do this, there must be a radical restructuring of the church. Reconstructionist feminist theology argues that more needs to be done than just allowing women to serve in ministry; “reconstructionist feminist theologians seek a liberating theological core for women within the Christian tradition, while also envisioning a deeper transformation, a true reconstruction, not only of their church structures, but also of civil society.”12 This is the stance that Mary Daly took in her first book. She argued that since women were created equal at the start of Genesis, they should then get equal rights as men in the church, but also that the church needed to do much more than what they were already doing in order to get there.13

In order for the patriarchal mindset of the church to be changed, there are a plethora of things that need to be done. Those who are in leadership now need to be convinced that women are equal to men. The problem is that there is no female voice in the church. This is not because there are no women speaking out, but it is because there are no women in power. But in order for women to get power, there needs to be a feminist voice that is actually heard by church leadership. It’s a frustrating cycle that has surely caused countless bright and promising women to leave the church. This is why there must be a grassroots, ground-up, foundational reconstruction of the church. One way to accomplish this would be through protest. If people were to leave the sexist churches behind and rallied around a church that heard the voices of the oppressed, the results could be monumental. It is also highly important that men speak up for women. Since men are still unfortunately in a position of privilege, perhaps one of the most efficient ways for equality to be reached is by the already powerful male voice in the church using his position to speak up for the oppressed. The Episcopal Church has heard the voices of women and has begun the necessary changes to become the Galatians 3:28 community. If all of the bright minds shunned by other denominations coalesced around a church like the Episcopal Church, their voices would become so loud that the greater Christian community would have to listen.

Overall, the Episcopal Church’s stance on women has gone in a positive direction in the last 40 years. Women are allowed to serve in ministry, and their highest position was held by a woman for nine years. It understands the nuances of feminism and of intersectionality while actually doing work to end systematic oppression of women. It has put systems in place to help women, especially women who are affected by other systems of oppression, get the treatment they deserve. Perhaps most importantly, they have the potential to be a light for other churches, and they can be a positive influence on Christianity. As Mary Daly said, “the reformed, democratized Church of the future is not yet here.”14 The Episcopal Church’s efforts are not yet enough. There needs to be a more powerful movement that can speak out against oppression and make waves in society. Moving forward, the Episcopal church should be a more vocal presence in the feminist movement, so people can hear their message and join them in working for full equality. The Episcopal Church’s idealogical shift towards progressive values has shown skeptics that Christianity is not irredeemably patriarchal and is compatible with feminism. People who want equality for all genders can still strive for their goals in a Christian setting without compromising either their Christian or their feminist ideals; in fact, the people who do this will end up changing the world for the better through their efforts.


Works Cited

Clifford, Anne M. Introducing Feminist Theology. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2002. 

Daly, Mary. The Church and the Second Sex. Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 1968. 

Interview with Rev. Kim Rossi. 29 November 2015. 

“Statement by the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America to the 59th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.” The Episcopal Church. 20 March 2015.

Endnotes

[1] Mary Daly, The Church and the Second Sex, Boston, Mass.: Beacon Press, 1968.1

[2] Anne M. Clifford, Introducing Feminist Theology. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2002; 146.2 [3] [3] Clifford, Introducing, 146.

[4] Ibid., 28.

[5] Ibid., 28

[6] Interview with Rev. Kim Rossi, 29 November 2015. 

[7] “Statement by the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America to the 59th session of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women,” The Episcopal Church, 20 March 2015. 

[8] “Statement,” The Episcopal Church, 20 March 2015.

[9] Interview with Rev. Kim Rossi, 29 November 2015.

[10] Interview with Rev. Kim Rossi, 29 November 2015

[11] “Statement,” The Episcopal Church, 20 March 2015.

[12] Clifford, Introducing, 34.

[13] Daly, The Church, 1968

[14] Ibid.

Equality and How to Get It: Learning from the Canaanite Woman: Matthew 15:21-28

*This is a featured article by guest author Jake Waehner, Graduate of Roberts Wesleyan College*

Matthew 15:21-28 (ESV)

21 And Jesus went away from there and withdrew to the district of Tyre and Sidon. 22 And behold a Canaanite woman from that region came out and was crying, “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon.” 23 But he did not answer her a word. And his disciples came and begged him, saying, “Send her away, for she is crying out after us.” 24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” 25 But she came and knelt before him, saying, “Lord, help me.” 26 And he answered, “It is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs.” 27 She said, “Yes, Lord, yet even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table.” 28 Then Jesus answered her, “O woman, great is your faith! Be it done for you as you desire.” And her daughter was healed instantly.

Introduction

Any story where Jesus seemingly brushes off and even insults a person who comes to him for help is bound to incite debate. The faith of the Canaanite woman is one of the few examples in the Gospels where this happens, and it raises a myriad of questions. Why did Jesus act so rudely to this woman? Did this lowly Gentile woman change his opinion of her in their conversation? Did Jesus learn from this woman, or was he just testing her? Why did the author of the Gospel of Matthew include this in their work, especially as what many scholars assert is the climax of the work? This passage often causes dissonance between the story’s possible interpretation and the reader’s pre-conceived notions of Jesus. How can one settle the dissonance between the pre-conceived notion of Jesus’ kind and compassionate nature and the jarring conversation between him and the Canaanite?

The story of the Canaanite woman is meant to challenge the historical and societal views of the time. It is made clear in the passage, as well as throughout the Old Testament, that the Canaanite people were seen as the outsiders of society. In addition to this, women were also oppressed in this highly patriarchal society. This passage is significant in that it is a succinct description of how Jesus pushed against the oppressive societal norms of the time.

This passage is meant to emphasize the need for a boundless Christian community that would eventually grow into a worldwide society. The dialog between Jesus and the Canaanite woman is one that pushes against the oppressive nature of society in first century Israel. When it was written in the first century, it was meant to bring the church back to a culture of equality and acceptance of all nations, as well as of both men and women. Today, the story of the Canaanite woman can be seen as the same call to action against an oppressive society. This call applies not only to women and racial minorities, but also to groups such as the homosexual and transgendered communities, groups of people that might not have the same rights as the highest class of people.

Structural Analysis

There is some debate concerning the genre of the pericope which could affect how the passage is interpreted. It is first important to understand that “the overall plan of the story follows a “U-shaped plot,” which is characterized by a state of equilibrium at the start, followed by a disruption—adversity or misunderstanding,” followed by “some other action that turns things for the better.”1 This plot is common in literature, and while it might not affect how the story is interpreted, it is necessary to understand that it is written in an oral story-telling fashion. This passage could also be considered a lament song in narrative form; it has a plea from the woman to open the dialogue (15:22), followed by praise by Jesus (15:28).2 It is framed by denial of the plea (15:23) followed by the eventual fulfillment of said original plea (15:28). This interpretation places emphasis on the solution of the woman's problem. However, the placement of the story in the climactic center of the Gospel would imply that it means more than the immediate implications of the meeting of the Canaanite woman and Jesus.

The story of the Canaanite woman is unique and is therefore difficult to place into one genre. The story of the Canaanite woman could also be considered a "controversy dialogue", but in those, Jesus generally comes out victorious, so this story is still an anomaly.3 The issues at hand in this passage are undoubtedly controversial, but what is important is that the woman, who is part of more than one oppressed groups, enters the conversation oppressed and leaves it justified.

Historical Background

In this passage, it is important to consider how society had changed from the time that the events described had taken place and when the Gospel of Matthew was actually written.

During the time of Jesus' ministry, women played a prominent role, accompanying Jesus on his journeys, providing financial and other support, and being present on his final trip to Jerusalem and at his crucifixion. Even in Paul's time (50 to 60 CE.), women had roles as pastors, teachers, and prophets. But, by the time Matthew's Gospel was written some 30 years later, the situation was changing; near the end of the first century, women began to face serious challenges from those opposed to their having status or holding positions of power.4

This progression is outlined throughout the New Testament, from Jesus’ female disciples, to Phoebe the deacon in Acts and the Pauline epistles, as well as in the passages about female oppression in I Timothy. So when Matthew’s Gospel was written, it is possible that the author was attempting to push society towards equality just like Jesus did in the original events.

When attempting to apply the significance of this passage to today, it is important to consider how controversial the actions of the Canaanite woman were. “She places herself outside the patriarchal structures of being unclean, silent, passive and a wife in a male-head family. This woman is not framed by culture or doctrine.”5 Since she has already broken free from the societal norms of her own time, it is much easier to apply the passage to other oppressed groups, such as the LGBTQ+ community and racial minorities.

Context

This passage can be seen as the focal point in the book of Matthew. Chapters 9 through 20 form a large chiasm, in which the story of the Canaanite woman is the center; the structure is as follows:

A Two blind men (9:27-31)

Β Sign of Jonah (12:38-42)

C Feeding of 5,000 (14:13-21)

D Canaanite woman ( 15:22-28)

C’ Feeding of 4,000 (15:32-38)

B' Sign of Jonah (16:1-4)

A' Two blind men (20:29-34)[ Baffes, "Jesus and,” 15.]

Its place in the structural center of Matthew's Gospel is important to consider, as it conveys the narrative of the Canaanite woman as an instrumental part of the overlying story. The story of the Canaanite woman  illustrates a central idea in Christ's ministry: all people are welcome in it, and even the most oppressed people, namely women and the Canaanites as a whole, are shown as having value.

Matthew 15:21-28

Jesus Withdraws, the Canaanite Woman Approaches (21-22a)

In the opening of the pericope, Jesus and the disciples are headed towards the district of Tyre and Sidon. “The established pattern of the mission given to the disciples by Jesus in Matt 10:5-6, "Go nowhere among the Gentiles," helps us to locate Jesus out of Tyre and Sidon. This leads us to read in 15:22 that the Canaanite woman is the one crossing the borderlands.”7 “Go nowhere among the Gentiles” implies a command to stay in Israel. The Greek word eis, used as “to” could be translated as “towards”; “Jesus withdrew towards the district of Tyre and Sidon” (15:21). This simple change in translation, which would seem to make more sense given the command in Matthew 10:5-6, makes the Canaanite woman the one who is outside of her homeland of Tyre, as Jesus has not yet arrived there.

It would follow, since Jesus has withdrawn, that either they are between Tyre and Sidon and Israel, in an intermediate are or they actually have left Israel and Jesus’s instruction limited them to Israel not because he did not want to minister to the Gentiles, but because the disciples needed a boundary to work with.8-9 Regardless, this is significant because Jesus has literally pushed the boundaries of where he ministers. Jesus, by doing something as simple as leaving his homeland, pushes society towards new values. “The fact that the woman meets Jesus in his own territory implies that she is accepting the temporal priority of the Jews, a priority that is reinforced in Matthew when the woman is called a Canaanite, and when she calls Jesus "son of David."”10 This shows that the woman understood the status quo going into the conversation, but the end result signifies that she left the conversation on equal footing with the Jews.

There is a parallel passage of this story in the Markan Gospel, but the woman is identified as "Syrophoenician" and not "Canaanite." Other than this, there is virtually no difference between the two passages, though this is the only time the term “Canaanite” is used in the Gospels.11 This is a huge difference and shows just how unique the passage in Matthew is. The Canaanites were hated by Israel, which gives the story in Matthew an overtone of social justice and equality as its intended point, and while the Gentiles were seen as less than the Jews in Israel, they had more overall social standing than the Canaanites; this change illustrates the deeply rooted conflict between the Jews and the Canaanites: "... you must not do as they do in the land of Canaan, where I am bringing you ... Do not follow their practices. Keep my requirements and do not follow any of the detestable customs that were practiced before you came and do not defile yourselves with them" (Lev 18:3, 30).12 There are not a lot of groups more hated than the Canaanites in first century Israel, and when coupled with her gender, this woman is probably the lowest of the low on the social hierarchy.

The Disciples Want to Send Away a Woman in Need (22b-23)

The next part of the pericope is where the controversy builds. When the Canaanite woman cries out to Jesus to help her and her daughter, the Jewish disciples knee-jerk reaction is to send her away; this is the typical relationship between the Jews and the Canaanites in first century Israel. This reaction is so innate that even when Jesus is silent, the disciples answer for him. It must have taken a great amount of bravery for an outsider like the Canaanite woman to approach Jesus; so much so that Jesus initially had no words for her (15:23).13 The first thought one might have when reading the passage for the is that the disciples wanted Jesus to heal her quickly so she would leave them alone. However the Greek word apoluein, meaning to release or dismiss, is ambiguous: do the disciples want Jesus to heal her daughter and thereby release her or send her away without healing?14 “Jesus' initial response to the woman's request is to ignore her completely. Perhaps on the narrative level he is taken aback to hear a Gentile woman address him in this way.”15 When one considers how surprising this must have been in that time, Jesus’s response takes on an air of stunned silence, which may be appropriate. What is more surprising though, is Jesus’s response when he finally does speak in verse 24.

Jesus and the Woman Push Each Other (24-27)

There is a role reversal between Jesus and the Canaanite woman in this section that sheds some light on how it should be interpreted: Jesus takes on the role of the learner, whereas the woman is the one doing the teaching.16 Contextually, the woman’s Gentile culture would have exposed her to logic and rhetoric; this adds to the story in that Jesus would have known that her background would facilitate debate. In this way, she comes to a man she has never met so that she can beg for his help, then this man insults her. However, the woman uses this insult and turns it around to work for her, and emerges from the debate victorious. This is indicative of Cynic philosophy, which was common both in Greek and early Christian circles.17

Jesus’ seemingly harsh response seems less abrasive when looked at in this way. However, he still calls the Canaanite woman a “dog”, which would be a scathing insult in the first century. “It is unreasonable to believe that if Jesus intended to be harsh he would have used the word kynarion – ‘little dogs’, meaning, not the scavengers that roam the streets, but house dogs.”18 From a literary point of view, this also echoes an earlier section in the Gospel of Matthew when Jesus says in Matthew 7:6, “Do not give dogs what is holy, and do not throw your pearls before pigs, lest they trample them underfoot and turn to attack you.”

Matthew 15:25 contains a number of important words and phrases that point to the Canaanite woman’s faith in Jesus. “If she has already shown her understanding of Jesus' true nature in the ascription of a messianic title, she now goes a step further and takes up a position, which for Matthew frequently represents worship.”19 Additionally, the Greek word proskuneo, translated here in verse 25 as “knelt before him”, connotes worship or reverent faith; this is a term commonly used in the Gospel of Matthew.20 “Her cry, kurios, boetheo moi, is not identical to that of Peter in the sea-walking farce, but nevertheless carries the same overtones.”21 She does not know Jesus but understands who he is as well as Peter, who has been following him for a long time. These phrases seem to imply that the Canaanite woman knew who Jesus was and had faith in him, which is more than can be said for many of the Jewish people that Jesus had come into contact with.

It is implied, then, that Jesus and the Canaanite woman had an understanding of each other. Therefore, it became possible for Jesus to make these incendiary statements so he could work with her to redefine the roles of both foreign peoples and women. "She did not accept the limits set for her by a patriarchal culture and society. She resisted the patriarchal norms, which discriminated against her and labeled her as an outcast and an outsider."22 This section sets up the scene for the eventual redefinition of how these groups of people were to be treated in society while also setting up a precedent and a moral example for others to follow.

Jesus Rewards Her Faith at Once (28)

This verse contains the fruits of the Canaanite woman’s efforts. “The woman's quick reply to Jesus finally elicits from him the response for which she has been seeking. . . her willingness to take on the part of being humble in the face of prejudice and downright rudeness eventually brings its reward.”23 In this verse, the Greek word megas, meaning “great”, is emphasized, so it is sometimes italicized in the Bible for emphasis.24 This only adds to the Canaanite woman’s already special status as one praised by Jesus. The fact that she is so highly lauded by Jesus is important because she both a Canaanite and a woman. By making this story the focal point of Matthew’s Gospel, it is shown that the significance of this story is greater than what is seen in the story itself. The ending of this passage especially shows that all people, including the marginalized and hated, deserve love and compassion, and that one can learn from them.

The daughter is only spoken of twice in the passage (verses 22 and 28), though she could be considered the most important character.25 In a literary context, she acts as an agent of fate, bringing Jesus and the Canaanite woman together. In this way, the passage becomes more than just a story of just healing. Symbolically, the daughter could be seen as something much more than a child in need of healing. While she is indeed healed, this passage marks the beginning of a process of healing between the upper class, the patriarchy, or the Jewish people as a whole, and the lower-class outsiders and the oppressed. The Canaanite woman’s daughter can be seen as representative of the repaired relationship, or at least the beginning of said repairing, between these groups in this way.

Conclusion

The story of the Canaanite woman is a story of the beginning of a progressive social change. The inclusion of the Canaanite woman makes room for the incorporation of all groups who were once considered unclean, which included the disabled and LGBTQ+ people. Additionally, readers get a reenactment of how one can make a positive change to society in the future.

“The author of Matthew intentionally portrayed Jesus in the story of the Canaanite woman as the learner (rather than teacher) so that he could demonstrate first-hand the transformation that needed to take place in the disciples and in the Jewish leaders.”26 Jesus plays the part of the oppressor (verses 24 and 26) so that the Canaanite woman could push back against the injustice that she and a plethora of others like her experienced (verses 25 and 27). In this way, Jesus has provided his followers with a way to push society toward equality for all people, one that is without oppression and hatred. Jesus showed that the best way to show someone anything is by literally showing them. “Rather than giving an explanation of a concept, the wisdom teacher invites disciples into an experience of the reality or truth itself.”27

“The message in Matthew is a call for us to examine our centrist views. . . believing that whoever "we" are is the norm and everyone else is "other." The story of the Canaanite woman helps us recognize that we are not as different from each other as we would like to believe we are.”28 The Canaanite woman shows the reader that those who are marginalized and considered to be outside of the norm in society are still valuable and part of God’s people. The fallacious beliefs of dualism– that some things are holy and that other are bad, must be done away with. The people who are not accepted by Christian society are not the only ones who have bodies filled with the spirit; this includes not only women and racial minorities such as the Canaanites, but also those who are marginalized today, like the LGBTQ+ community or the disabled. “Theology should challenge metaphysic and dualistic thought. The bodies of women and homosexual persons should be taken as sites of revelation in the creation of theology.”29 There are still things about God and his grace that humanity does not understand, and it is possible that LGBTQ+ people is included in this category; there is more to learn about them and their place in the church. The Canaanite woman’s praise and reward from Jesus opens the door for all people to be loved.

Like the LGBTQ+ community, the Canaanites were seen as unclean and as part of a lower class. This is a dualistic concept in which it is thought that religious, "righteous" people are the norm of society while anyone who does not fit this mold is unholy. In this passage, Jesus does more than redefine who is part of this higher echelon of society; he abolishes this hierarchy as a whole. It was not the Canaanite woman's race or gender that made her unclean, but it was the absence of compassion from the religious that left her on the outside. In the same way, "it is also not the homosexual person's sexual relationship [or gender identity] that makes him and her impure, but lack of love and the condemnation that comes from the hearts of those who condemn and oppress them and from the structures that sustain it."30 Just as it is today, homosexual people were considered unclean and were seen as not fitting into God’s plan for the world,31 and the other members of the LGBTQ+ community were unheard of at the time. The story of the Canaanite woman provides sufficient evidence against this position because she would have been considered as part of the same unclean and extraneous group.

When viewed this way, the story of the Canaanite woman becomes a call for a society that is accepting of all groups of people, including those considered impure. Additionally, the woman shows the audience how to push against societal norms. This passage then becomes a goal to abolish this dualistic class system and form a society in which all people are treated with compassion and love.

Works Cited

Baffes, Melanie S. "Jesus and the Canaanite woman: a story of reversal." Journal Of Theta Alpha Kappa 35/2 (2011): 12-23. 

Guardiola-Sáenz, Leticia A.  "Borderless Women and Borderless Texts: A Cultural Reading of Matthew 15:21-28." Semeia 78/1 (1997): 69-81.

Gibbs, Jeffery A. Matthew 11:2-20:34. Concordia Commentary. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2010.

Hart, Lawrence D., OPA. “The Canaanite Woman: Meeting Jesus as Sage and Lord: Matthew 15:21-28 & Mark 7:24-30.” The Expository Times 122/1 (2010): 20-25.

Nortjé-Meyer, Lilly.  "The homosexual body without apology: a positive link between the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:21-28 and homosexual interpretation of biblical texts." Religion & Theology 9/1-2 (2002): 118-134. 

Scott, J Martin C. "Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case for Jesus' Manners." Journal For The Study Of The New Testament 63 (1996): 21-44.

Senior, Donald. Matthew. Abingdon New Testament Commentaries. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1998.

Wainwright, Elaine M. “Not Without My Daughter: Gender and Demon Possession in Matthew 15:21-28.” In A Feminist Companion to Matthew. Ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marianne Blickenstaff. Cleveland, OH: The Pilgrim Press, 2004. Pp. 126-137.

Endnotes

[1] Melanie S. Baffes, "Jesus and the Canaanite woman: a story of reversal," Journal Of Theta Alpha Kappa 35/2 (2011): 12-23, 18.

[2] Baffes, “Jesus and,” 16.

[3] J. Martin C. Scott, "Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case for Jesus' Manners," Journal For The Study Of The New Testament 63 (1996): 25. 

[4] Baffes, “Jesus and,” 14.

[5] Lilly Nortjé-Meyer,  "The homosexual body without apology: a positive link between the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15:21-28 and homosexual interpretation of biblical texts," Religion & Theology 9/1-2 (2002): 130.

[6] Baffes, "Jesus and,” 15.

[7] Leticia A. Guardiola-Sáenz, "Borderless Women and Borderless Texts: A Cultural Reading of Matthew 15:21-28," Semeia 78/1 (1997): 74.

[8] Elaine M. Wainwright, “Not Without My Daughter: Gender and Demon Possession in Matthew 15:21-28,” in A Feminist Companion to Matthew (Ed. Amy-Jill Levine and Marianne Blickenstaff; Cleveland, OH: The Pilgrim Press, 2004), 132.

[9] Scott, “Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case,” 38.

[10] Guardiola-Sáenz, “Borderless,” 75.

[11] Baffes, “Jesus and,” 16.

[12] Nortjé-Meyer, “The homosexual body,” 130.

[13] Guardiola-Sáenz, “Borderless,” 77.

[14] Donald Senior, Matthew (Abingdon New Testament Commentaries; Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press, 1998), 181.

[15] Scott, “Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case,” 37.

[16] Baffes, “Jesus and,” 17.

[17] Scott, “Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case,” 24.

[18] Lawrence D. Hart, OPA, “The Canaanite Woman: Meeting Jesus as Sage and Lord: Matthew 15:21-28 & Mark 7:24-30,” The Expository Times 122/1 (2010): 24.

[19] Scott, “Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case,” 38.

[20] Senior, Matthew, 182.

[21] Scott, “Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case,” 38.

[22] Nortjé-Meyer, “The homosexual body,” 131.

[23] Scott, “Matthew 15:21-28: A Test-Case,” 41.

[24] Jeffery A. Gibbs, Matthew 11:2-20:34 (Concordia Commentary; St. Louis, MO: Concordia Publishing House), 2010.

[25] Wainwright, “Not Without,” 132.

[26] Baffes, “Jesus and,” 18.

[27] Hart, “The Canaanite Woman: Meeting Jesus,” 22.

[28] Baffes, “Jesus and,” 20-21.

[29] Nortjé-Meyer, “The homosexual body,” 133.

[30] Nortjé-Meyer, “The homosexual body,” 131.

[31] Nortjé-Meyer, “The homosexual body,” 131.

C.S. Lewis, Joy and A Grief Observed

A few months ago, I lost someone very near and dear to my heart - my Grandmother. Never one to miss a beat, she was born on Christmas day, and she passed away on Good Friday! My Grandmother and I have been very close all of my life; I was her first grand-child, and we spent hours upon hours together as I grew up. It is well-known that we often took several hours to talk on the phone about our day, about news, the current issues in my life (from middle school drama to high school romance, finances in college or discernment with the friars), and many other things. Needless to say, I was very, very close with my Grandma Merrie. As a result, her passing - as with any loss - has caused me to go through a lot of grieving. This has expressed itself in a myriad of ways, from sudden frustration and anger to an outburst of tears at a familiar smell, an uncovering of an old letter (she always wrote long letters to me) or disbelief - as when I first received the call. Grieving has most certainly been something I have experienced much more vividly now than any loss before. Therefore, I felt it was time to put my love for C.S. Lewis and his life and work to good use, and take the opportunity to look at how he coped with a major loss in his life, and what that meant for him. The following is the result of that exploration.

C.S. Lewis once wrote, "No one ever told me that grief felt so like fear. I am not afraid, but the sensation is like being afraid. The same fluttering in the stomach, the same restlessness, the yawning."[1] Clive Staples Lewis (1898-1963) was a Christian author, apologist and lay theologian. He had not always been a Christian, however. Lewis was part of a group called The Inklings, a group which J.R.R. Tolkien (Lord of the Rings, The Hobbit, etc.) also belonged to. Tolkien was a Roman Catholic, and along with Hugo Dyson, another friend, Lewis eventually converted to Christianity although much to the chagrin of Tolkien, he joined the Church of England (Anglican Church) and not the Catholic Church. Lewis married American poet and writer Helen Joy Davidman Gresham in 1956. Tolkien did not fully approve of his friend's marriage as Joy had been married before, and was therefore a divorcee. Regardless, the two wed. According to his brother Warren, Lewis was initially attracted to Joy's intellectual prowess. He had not encountered a woman before who could match wits with him. She had been diagnosed with terminal bone cancer; hence, Lewis knew beforehand that her time was limited.

At the time, the Church of England was not in the habit of performing marriage ceremonies for one who had been divorced, but Lewis' friend, Reverend Peter Bride, performed the ceremony at her hospital bed in March 1957 - the second ceremony, as the first in 1956 was a secret civil ceremony. Her cancer went into brief remission, and the couple lived together for four years, until her death in 1960. A Grief Observed, published in 1961 under the pseudonym N.W. Clerk, is the written reflections of Lewis after the loss of his wife. In the introduction, his step-son Douglas points out that the title is A Grief Observed because it is not the perfect book that deals with grief, but one man's individual experience with grief. The work was later published under the name of C.S. Lewis, as he felt it was good for the reader to know who he was. About twenty years prior, Lewis had written The Problem of Pain, a remarkable work (as are the majority of his works) in which he examines theodicy. Theodicy is essentially the question and attempts at answering how a divine being could allow pain, suffering, and evil - something he struggled with as an apologist. In A Grief Observed, however, while his reasoning and logical deductions are present, there is a kind of internal struggle between logic and emotion, a bit like Spock from the Star Trek franchise.

Oddly enough, several of Lewis' friends recommended the book to him while it was still under the pseudonym as a way for him to deal with the loss of Joy. In these reflections, the candidness and openness about his feelings makes us sympathize for Lewis. His books - such as Mere Christianity and The Problem of Pain - illustrate the rhetoric of one of the most brilliant men in the twentieth century, and A Grief Observed shows what happens when you take a man's emotional balance away, something also very relatable. In his reflections, Lewis struggled with theodicy once again, and as he was focused on the emotional aspects, found it difficult to simply reason away. For example, he attempts to address the comments of friends and family who try to help him in his grief. In reaction to the comment, "she is in God's hands," he says, "But if so, she was in God's hands all the time, and I have seen what they did to her here. Do they suddenly become gentler to us the moment we are out of the body? And if so, why?"[2] He faces doubt more than once, but notes that he will not become an atheist, "Not that I am (I think) in much danger of ceasing to believe in God. The real danger is of coming to believe such dreadful things about Him. The conclusion I dread is not 'So there's no God after all,' but 'So this is what God's really like...".[3]

From the outset, Lewis is facing depression. He does not wish to talk with many people, he wonders why God gave him the desire of his heart only to painfully rip it away, and he struggles to find meaning once more. I initially faced a similar struggle once I returned to my Franciscan community to work and serve shortly after my Grandmother's funeral. Ultimately, Lewis finds meaning and begins to accept the "necessity of suffering" as outlined in The Problem of Pain, but the sting is too fresh at first, which is of course a deeply human and very understandable reaction. Essentially, by the end of A Grief Observed, Lewis has accepted the death of Joy (both literally and figuratively), having experienced both Depression and Acceptance - two important stages of the grieving process. He had always anticipated the event, but once it actually happened, he had difficult accepting the loss. As a consequence, Lewis goes through a kind of withdrawal from God and society around him. Also, he faces the idea and memory of Joy. Lewis does not want his mental image of her to become the object of his love. He notes, "Already, less than a month after her death, I can feel the slow, insidious beginning of a process that will make the [Joy] I think of into a more and more imaginary woman.... The reality is no longer there to check me, to pull me up short, as the real [Joy] so often did, so unexpectedly, by being so thoroughly herself and not me."[4] I imagine this is how many feel after the loss of a loved one.

On a psychological and biological level, Lewis appears to experience several common symptoms of grief, such as the tightness of throat - he notes that he keeps swallowing, presumably to loosen the tightness - he has disturbed sleeping patterns, experiences fatigue as well as a loss of energy and strength. He is unable to concentrate on many things, with Joy always on his mind. He grows impatient with the many cliches he hears from friends and family, such as "there is no death" or "death doesn't matter." He wrote in response, "There is death. And whatever is matters. And whatever happens has consequences. and it and they are irrevocable and irreversible. You might as well say that birth doesn't matter.... She died. She is dead. Is the word so difficult to learn?"[5] By this point, he has accepted the reality of the loss, and is able to work through his grief from there. He tries to adjust to his environment where she is no longer present, but writes that "I dread the moments when the house is empty."[6]

As a final point, Lewis does indeed go through several stages of general grief patterns, but experiences it differently in some ways given his background and worldview than others might. For example, in India, death is often a widely celebrated event, as it often marks the next phase of existence. Lewis' culture and personality - he was an intellectual giant and had a brilliant mind - came through in his grieving process. His religious background certainly had a heavy influence upon how he grieved, but he faced challenges in trying to reconcile faith and loss. His emotional honesty comes through as he describes his struggles, as well as his personality. The death of his wife was not sudden, and he may have previously "gone through the motions" during the four years that they were married in preparation for when he would lose her. Lewis had abundant social support, although as he notes some avoided him - not knowing what to say to him, but as the bereaved, along with several years of preparing for her death, Lewis is not unlike many men and women who go through similar stages. His reflections are also inspiring, and in many ways I can relate to his grief through my grieving over my Grandmother - demonstrating that it is deeply and truly human to struggle with loss and to experience - and observe - grief.

Endnotes

[1] Lewis, C.S. A Grief Observed. New York: HarperOne, 1994. 3. Print.

[2] Ibid., 27.

[3] Ibid., 7.

[4] Ibid., 18.

[5] Ibid., 15.

[6] Ibid., 3.