Grace, Race and the Faith of the Canaanite Woman

No passage is more principle to the racial exclusivist interpretations of Christian Identity than the story of the woman of Canaan, recorded in both the Gospels of Mark (7:24-30) and Matthew (15:21-28). On paper, the story tells an instance of a woman of alien heritage who seeks mercy from Christ to heal her daughter, and after several rejections (indirect and direct) she acknowledges her status as a "dog" and for her demonstration of humility is granted her wish and her daughter is healed of her demon. The reasons for interpreting this passage in an exclusivist light are appealing:

• The woman who approaches Christ in the district of Sidon and Tyre (Matt. 15:21) is described as a Canaanite (v. 22), the most accursed race known within the pages of Scripture and ancient enemy of the Israelites.
• She implores Jesus to heal her daughter who is "possessed by a demon" (v. 22). Christ is addressed as 'Lord' and 'Son of David' (v. 22) by the Canaanite, acknowledging His royal and messianic status within the Judean faith. Jesus still answers her "not a word" (v. 23).
• The disciples then begged Christ, "send her away!" (v. 23). To which, Christ responded by informing them that His ministry was "only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (v. 24). Israelites are therefore identified as the beneficiaries of Christ's ministry, and Canaanites rejected.
• She kneels before Him, "Lord help me" (v. 25). Jesus tells her that it is "not right to take the children's food and throw it to the dogs" (v. 26), showing a marked racial distinction between the children (Israelites) and dogs (Canaanites). Dogs are some of the most abhorred animals in Hebrew culture, representing uncleanness.
• In a show of humility, she accepts Jesus' identification of her as a dog and says that "even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from the masters' table" (v. 27). Christ declares the woman's faith to be "great" and heals her Canaanite daughter (v. 28).
• Nothing explicit is said of eternal life, or the granting of salvation to this woman or her daughter (beyond the temporal).

When these facts are taken into account, a face value reading may lead one to the conclusion that Canaanites are excluded from the New Covenant, or that the New Covenant is exclusively to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel". Let us scratch below the surface to see what is really going on.

The Woman of Canaan

Before we discuss the ramifications of this story at large, we should first endeavour to identify the key players. Of the woman, Mark's Gospel tells us:

²⁵Immediately a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit heard of him and came and fell down at his feet. ²⁶Now the woman was a Greek, a Syrophoenician by birth. And she begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter.
— Mark 7:25-26

Since the Gospel of Matthew identifies the woman as a Canaanite (Matt. 15:22), there stands some confusion as to how we can harmonise this with Mark's description of her as "a Greek, a Syrophoenician by birth/race (genei)". A distinction of intended audience must be noted here, with the Gospel of Mark (the earliest gospel) being written to a Gentile audience and the Gospel of Matthew being written to a Judean audience. In Mark's recollection, Syrophoenicia is the Greco-Roman moniker for the region of Canaan where the cities of Sidon and Tyre stand. In this instance, Syrophoenician stands in opposition to Libyophoenician (i.e. the Punics of N. Africa).

When Mark calls her 'Greek' (Hellēnis), it is in reference to cultural or religious identity, in contrast to the cultural-religious identity of the Judeans. Following the conquests of Alexander (336-323 BC) and ensuing Greek rule of Judea via the Ptolemaic and Seleucid empires (305-141 BC), there was a period of Hellenisation of Judean and Syrian culture. The land of Sidon and Tyre, sitting beyond the fringes of 1st century Judea in the land of Phoenicia, would've been an inheritor of Hellenic culture. The 2nd Book of Maccabees paints a vivid picture of the cultural conflict between the identities of Judeanism (ioudaismos) and Hellenism (hellenismos), laying the foundations for the context of the New Testament.

With that foundation laid, we can then turn to the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew, writing to a Hebrew audience versed in the stories and prophecies of the Hebrew Scriptures, freely identifies the woman as a Canaanite as his readers would be familiar with this tribe and their history alongside Israel. On the other hand, a Greek or Roman reader otherwise wouldn't have heard of the Canaanites as there was no extant people with this name in the 1st century, only their Phoenician and Punic successors.

An audience familiar with the Old Testament would recognise the importance of this woman being a Canaanite, a race to whom belonged the most primordial of curses (Gen. 9:25), who had a less-than-flattering history of adversity with Israel and were notorious for Ba'al worship. This woman was an outsider in more ways than one.

For the Lost Sheep of the House of Israel

Upon Jesus' withdrawal to the remnant Phoenician cities of Sidon and Tyre, the Canaanite woman approaches Him and His disciples (Matt. 15:21-22). “Have mercy on me, O Lord, Son of David; my daughter is severely oppressed by a demon” (v. 22). Christ "does not utter a word" and the disciples begged Him to "send her away, for she is crying out after us" (v. 23). Did the disciples want this cursed woman to be sent away empty handed or did they plea in her favour so she could leave them in peace?

We are told that Christ responded to the request of the disciples, "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (v. 24), indicating that they indeed wanted Jesus to grant the Canaanite her wish so that she could be dismissed. Christ would not have responded in this way unless the disciples were begging Him to heal her. Much has been made of this statement alone, some even going as far as to assume that the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" are the sole recipients of the New Covenant, emphasis on 'only'. How could the potential bearers of the New Covenant be anybody other than those to whom Christ said He was sent?

Proponents of Israelite exclusivity would be wise to cross reference Matthew 15:24 with its parallel in chapter 10:

⁵These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles [or nations] and enter no town of the Samaritans, ⁶but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.”
— Matthew 10:5-6

Here, Jesus gives the twelve apostles their mission, limiting the scope to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel". Simultaneously they are instructed not to go to the nations (Gentiles; ethnōn) or to any town of Samaritans. Contrary to what the exclusivists may posit, Christ clearly differentiates the Israelites from the Gentiles (whom Christian Identity claim are actually the 'lost sheep' of Israel). Given that the revelation of the inclusion of the gentiles in the New Covenant is given in Acts 10, it is only logical to conclude that this exclusive mission to the 'lost sheep of the house of Israel' is limited to the earthly ministry of Jesus, and not the New Covenant at large. Matthew only corroborates this reality when Jesus issues His last instruction to the Apostles after the Resurrection:

¹⁸And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. ¹⁹Go therefore and make disciples of all nations [or Gentiles], baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”
— Matthew 28:18-19

The Great Commission of Matthew 28:18-20 is a triumphant expansion of the lesser commission of Matthew 10:5-6. Where the lesser was only to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" and excluded the nations, the greater is to make disciples of all nations (panta ethnē) which at one time were estranged from God, baptising them in the name of the Holy Trinity. The greater is the fulfilment of the lesser, and the lesser is a shadow of the greater. Matthew's Gospel from beginning to end represents a grand crescendo in God's plan to reconcile the estranged nations to Himself through Israel.

The Children and the Dogs

After Christ's response to His disciples, telling them His ministry is only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel, the woman falls to her knees to intercede for her daughter yet again. Addressing the woman for the first time, “it is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs” (v. 26). To the exclusivist this is surely a smoking gun, after all the Canaanite dogs are differentiated from the Israelite children, and Christ said He 'come only' for the latter (v. 24). To double down, the exclusivist might even appeal to the fact Christ tells us to "not give to dogs that which is holy" (Matt. 7:6) or that outside of the Heavenly City "are the dogs" (Rev. 22:15).

What is greatly overlooked here, however, is the linguistic nuance of the word which Jesus uses. In the statements of Matthew 7:6 and Revelation 22:15 the word kuón is used, which typically refers to a wild or stray dog and is usually done so in a derogatory light, given how dogs were seen as unclean or impure in eastern cultures (cf. Deut. 23:18; Psa. 59:6, 14). On the other hand, here in Matthew 15 Jesus instead uses the diminutive form, kunarion, to refer to the Canaanite woman. The diminutive would imply a small dog or a puppy, though more appropriately she was being compared to a house pet given the context of the reference to the table (v. 27).

It should be noted that some seek to completely deracialise this passage through a notion that the diminutive kunerion is not a racial demarcation but is instead a sympathetic term of affection. This explanation tends to fall flat due to the fact that a distinction between in-group (children) and out-group (dogs) is maintained throughout the passage, and Christ's rejection only intensifies from Him ignoring her (v. 23), to an emphasis on the appropriate beneficiaries of His mission (spoken to the disciples, v. 24), to an explicit denial that the dogs are the beneficiaries of His mission (v. 26).

O Woman, Great is your Faith!

The woman, upon bearing the offence of being called a dog (kunarion) states that "even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their masters' table" (v. 27). Despite a threefold rejection, she still accepts her place obediently and proclaims Jesus as Lord and Master. In the face of this unwavering fidelity, Christ proclaims, "O woman, great is your faith!" and bestows upon the Canaanite woman her wish, and her daughter is healed.

Some may object and point to the fact that "even the demons believe" (Jas. 2:19) or that "not everyone who says 'Lord, Lord' will enter the Kingdom of Heaven" (Matt. 7:21-23) as evidence that simple belief is not enough. However, we hear from the very words of the Son of God that her faith is 'great', with no indication that it was superficial. Would a demon's faith be declared 'great' by the Lord?

In contrast, throughout the Gospel of Matthew (6:30, 8:26, 14:31, 16:8) we see Jesus chastise His disciples for being of 'little faith' (ogilo-pistos), despite their Hebrew pedigree. Of the woman, He says she is of 'great faith' (megalē-pistis), despite her being of Canaanite origin. Earlier in this very same gospel we see the example of the Roman Centurion, who like the Canaanitess is not an Israelite yet supplicates before the Lord Jesus to heal his servant from paralysis. The man loved the Judean nation and had devoted a synagogue to God with his own hands (Luke 7:5). Amazed by the centurion's faith, Jesus responds:

¹⁰“Truly, I tell you, with no one in Israel have I found such faith. ¹¹I tell you, many will come from east and west and recline at table with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven, ¹²while the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
— Matthew 8:10-12

In direct parallel with the Canaanite woman, this centurion is also quite clearly not an Israelite. Never in Israel had Christ found such faith (Matt. 8:10), and this gentile is among the 'many' who will come from the "east and west" to recline with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, while the "sons of the kingdom" (i.e. children of the Old Covenant) will be cast out for their lack of faith. The unfaithful apostates of the Old Covenant will be cast out, and those of faith are adopted as the sons of God:

¹¹He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. ¹²But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become sons of God, ¹³who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
— John 1:11-13

St Matthew gives us two examples of gentiles who display abundant faith despite not yet being the appropriate recipients of the pre-Resurrection mission, and repeatedly contrasts this to Jesus' remarks about the little faith of His Israelite disciples. Both the centurion and especially the Canaanite woman are a foreshadowing of the Great Commission to reconcile all nations unto God. The grace and mercy granted to the Canaanite woman for her faith is but a mere shadow of the grace and mercy God grants to the whole world upon the cross.

The God-breathed pages of the New Testament tell the man of God all He needs to know about the nature of faith. By grace we have been "saved through faith", and this faith is "not of yourselves" but is the "gift of God" (Eph. 2:8-9). If faith is salvific and is granted to us by God's grace, then what can we infer from the fact that Jesus recognised the "great faith" of the Canaanite? If this faith were superficial or insincere, should He not have said "depart from me, I never knew you" (Matt. 7:23) rather than bless her offspring?

God said to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (Ex. 33:19; cf. Rom. 9:15-18), and upon this woman of ignoble and cursed origin He chose to bestow grace and mercy. Of the grace granted to Christians, we are told that this was given freely by the Father who chose us in Christ before the foundations of the earth, predestined for adoption as the sons of God (Ephesians 1:3-6). What right have we to question the grace God had preordained for the Canaanite woman before the foundations of the earth?

⁷Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham.
— Galatians 3:7

Conclusion

In total, the exclusivist interpretation of Christian Identity requires the isolated milking of Christ's threefold rejection of the Canaanite woman and His limitations of the pre-Resurrection mission to the Israelites, while simultaneously ignoring the fact that Christ's rejections not only tested her faith but deepened it, leading the Messiah to recognise her faith as great. One must also ignore the entire context of Matthew's Gospel, seeing as how Jesus limited His earthly ministry to the lost sheep of the house of Israel while excluding the nations (Matt. 10:5-6, 15:24), until after the Resurrection the risen Lord declares all authority on Heaven and Earth as His own and commands His people to go out into the world and "make disciples of all nations" (Matt. 28:18-19).

To deny the salvation of the Canaanite woman is to deny the Saviour who redeems us all. To deny the great faith of the Canaanite woman is to deny the Holy Spirit that brought this faith forth. To deny the Great Commission's proclamation to all the nations is to deny the Father whose plan it is to reconcile the world unto Himself.

"The great faith of this Chananaean woman is herein shewed. She believes Him to be God, in that she calls Him “Lord;” and man, in that she calls Him “Son of David”."
— The Glossa Ordinaria, by Anselm of Laon (died 1117)

³Therefore I want you to understand that no one speaking in the Spirit of God ever says “Jesus is accursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except in the Holy Spirit.
— 1st Corinthians 12:3