Matthew 15

Chap. XV. Ver. 1—20. The traditions of men compared with the commands of God.—It may be be proper to observe, that besides the laws of Moses, as recorded in the Pentateuch, the Rabbins pretend that he left a variety of oral traditions; that is, traditions delivered to him by the voice of God at Sinai, and handed down, from generation to generation, by word of mouth, to the time of our Lord, and even lower; for, it does not appear that any complete digest of them was put into writing till the latter part of the second century, by Rabbi Judas, surnamed the holy. This work (which makes six volumes, folio,) is called the Mishna, or second law, as containing a variety of additions to, and explanations of, the written law: these were pretended to be explicatory, but many of them were evasive, and some even subversive of the laws of Moses.

Of this we have an example in the chapter now before us. The Pharisees come to our Lord, complain that his disciples, on some occasion, when they had watched them, had taken food without washing their hands, which, it seems, the Pharisees always practised with great ceremony; not for cleanliness, but as a form required by the traditions of their elders, which were of higher authority with them than the laws of decency, or even of God himself. The law of Moses had pronounced sentence of death against those who cursed their parents, which implied not merely a hasty expression, (though that must be highly culpable,) but a neglect and abandonment of them, as though the parental relation had been dissolved: it was not merely a verbal, but a practical curse, of which our Lord gives this instance.

A Jew, finding that his parents, through age and infirmity, were likely to become a burden to him, devotes a part of his property to the temple, saying, “It is Corban;” that is, a gift; ‘I have devoted all I can spare, and therefore can do nothing for you.” This was sanctioned by the traditions of the elders, who thereby made void the law, releasing children from the natural and legal obligations which they owed to their parents; that is, from honouring them, as the law required. Thus, by presents to the temple, or the priests, they purchased a release from the obligations of the moral law: so says the Talmud—“Every one ought to honour his father and mother, except he hath vowed to the contrary;” which fully justifies our Lord’s assertion, that they made void the law.

Bishop Jebb, in his metrical version of verse 5, 6, seems to have rendered the passage clearer and more elegant. “But ye say: Whosoever shall say to his father or mother, (Be that) a gift, by which thou mightest have been relieved from me; Must also not honour his father or his mother: Thus have ye nullified the commandment of God by your tradition.” Well might our Lord call these people hypocrites, and apply to them the language of the prophet Todah, “Their heart is far from me!” Having thus far rectified the errors of the Scribes, our Lord explains the nature and source of moral pollution. Under the new dispensation, it is not what a man eats or drinks that renders him obnoxious in the sight of God: for “the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.”

((Romans 14:17).) But what truly defiles a man is that which springeth from his evil heart; “for out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders.” The heart of man being corrupted by the fall, has become the fountain of iniquity, from which all these evil streams do flow. “And doth a fountain, (asks St. James,) send forth, at the same place, sweet water and bitter?” ((Matthew 3:11).) Can that depraved heart, which is the source of every iniquity, produce also devotion to God, and benevolence to man? “O God, unto whom all hearts are open, all desires known, and from whom no secrets are hid, cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of thine Holy Spirit, that we may perfectly love thee, and worthily magnify thy holy name, through Christ our Lord! Amen.”

Ver. 21—39. The daughter of a woman of Canaan healed, with sundry other miracles.—This woman, though of Canaan’s accursed race, (who, according to Lightfoot, occupied the country about Tyre and Sidon,) was a remarkable monument, not only of our Lord’s miraculous power, but also of his saving grace; and in her was exhibited a specimen of that mercy promised to the Gentiles. It is observable, that though our Lord confined the ministry of his Apostles, during his lifetime, to the Jews, he did not so restrict his own ministrations; but in one instance visited a Samaritan woman; in another, the servant of a Roman centurion; and in a third, this “outcast among the heathen;” this Syro-Phoenician woman, his conduct towards whom appears most extraordinary, till explained by the sequel.

Jesus was now in the farther part of Galilee, on the very boundary of Judea, and she ran crying after him, “Have mercy upon me, O Lord:” and at the same time evinced her faith in him, by calling him, “the Son of David,” or the Messiah. She then earnestly implored mercy on herself, by the healing of her daughter, who was grievously vexed See note on with a demon. On this we may observe, by the way, that some of the greatest mercies we receive, are those bestowed upon our children.—At first Jesus seems to turn a deaf ear towards her, for “he answered her not a word.” This, however, did not dismay her: she exhibited that perseverance which our Lord had recommended in his sermon on the mount. She asks till she receives; she seeks till she finds; and she knocks till the door of mercy is effectually opened.

In short, she wearies out the disciples, (though she could not hear, and they beg him to dismiss her by an answer of some kind or other, though they seem doubtful what that should be, as they perceived that she was a Gentile. To them he replied, not to her, “I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Upon this, she pressed nearer to him, till she fell down at his feet and worshipped him, saying, “Lord, help me!” the language both of anxiety and distress. The Lord now condescended to speak to her; but not with his usual tenderness: “It is not meet, (said he,) to take the children’s bread and cast it unto dogs.” At this word she eagerly caught. “Truth, Lord,” said she, I am a Gentile dog, “yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters’ table.”

The Saviour appears now completely overcome with her importunity. His bowels doubtless yearned over her, (as did those of Joseph when he spake roughly to his brethren,) and he exclaimed, “O woman! great is thy faith: be it unto thee according to thy word!” “Truth, Lord,” we were Gentile dogs. “Lord, how should we (Christians) bless thy name, that we of dogs are made children! How should we fear thy justice, since thine ancient people are become dogs! O let us not be high-minded, but tremble. If they were cut off who crucified thee in thine humble state, what may we expect who crucify thee daily in thy glory?” (Bp. Hall.) After the cure of this Gentile’s daughter, our Lord, as he was wont, went up into the side of a mountain, where he was speedily surrounded with hearers, and with proper subjects for the exertion of his miraculous power; and when the multitude saw the wonders which Jesus wrought, they were not only struck with admiration, but “glorified the God of Israel.”

After three days, (or on the third day,) the people probably discovered symptoms of hunger and fatigue, and our Saviour fed them by a miracle, so similar to that in the preceding chapter, that we need not dwell on it; yet so varied in its circumstances as to demonstrate it was not the same. (See ch. xvi. 9.) The disciples, however, reasoned and acted as if they had totally forgotten the preceding event; which would appear the forget providential appearances and supplies.