The Subversive & Sassy Syrophoenician Saint

An Unorthodox Examination of Mark 7:24-29

We live in a day where an examination of our individual biases and prejudices has taken center stage. Recent social and political events in the United States, in particular, have revealed just how little progress has actually been made in the fight for racial justice, LGBTQIA+ rights, and woman’s equality, as a growing minority of the country- 75 million people, at least- have thrown their support behind political candidates whose policy agendas explicitly target and seek to roll back gains that have been made for these minority communities over the past twenty years. These attacks and the response to them have forced most of the country into uncomfortable but essential conversations about topics like white privilege, implicit bias, and inherited prejudices, forcing us to reckon with the ways these realities live within each of us and demanding that we finally take action to confront them.

As a Christian pastor during this most turbulent season of American history, I have personally felt the pressure to need to do my best to help both my congregations and me to reckon with the ways that we are complicit in these oppressive realities but have often struggled to do so in ways that are easily understandable to the average person in the pew. More than this, it has been difficult to find concrete examples to point to as instructive for how Christians should respond when we are confronted with the harsh reality of the ways that our biases and prejudice negatively impact the minorities in our community. So often, prejudice is invisible to the one who has it until it is confronted, and when it is, the response far too often is one of defensiveness instead of acknowledgment and commitment to change.

Therefore I set out to find some tool within the Christian tradition to provide an example for how Christians could engage in these essential conversations and make the changes that we need to help create a more just and equal world for everyone. As a natural start, I began exploring the life and teachings of Jesus in the Gospels, drawing on the commentaries of a vast array of Black, queer, and womanist theologians to look for a place within the Gospel text that could be used to help teach my congregation how we should engage in this work of transformation.

I was surprised to stumble upon a great deal of writing on the familiar pericope of the healing of the Syrophoenician woman’s daughter in the Gospel of Mark 7 as story that precisely dealt with the topic of implicit bias and how to respond in a way that brings about more justice and inclusion. However, the person doing the confronting in this text was not Jesus- indeed, he was the one being confronted on what was framed as his own prejudice- but rather, the Syrophoenician woman who stood up to Jesus’ refusal to heal her daughter.

Obviously, from the lens of Christian orthodoxy, this reading raises many red flags- namely that orthodox Christology rests on the idea that Jesus is the perfect and sinless incarnation of God, and thus, could not possibly exhibit bias of any kind. Yet the plainest reading of this account in the Gospel of Mark suggest that Jesus does in fact exhibit some sort of bias towards the Syrophoenician woman, and even most orthodox theologians have been forced to reframe this story as Jesus’ “testing” the woman’s faith by essentially cosplaying as a person with bias to see if she would persist in her desperate request for his healing powers. This is hardly a more satisfying reading- it makes Jesus out to be especially cruel all for the sake of making sure this woman had “sufficient faith” before healing her daughter- even though in other places, Jesus states that it only takes faith the size of a “mustard seed”^[1]to move mountains.

Thus, I decided to take the hermeneutical journey that countless liberation theologians had taken, seeking to set aside orthodox assumptions about Jesus and instead looking at this text through the lens of “the historical Jesus”, seeing this pericope as an important moment in the life of the human Jesus, who like all of us, inherited biases from his culture, religion, and society, and is forever changed by his encounter with this subversive and sassy Syrophoenician saint.

Biases and Tensions in First Century Israel

To begin with, it is important to understand the way that bias manifested itself in Jesus’ first century Jewish context. Great care must be taken to avoid painting the first century Jews as viewing themselves as “superior” or exhibiting extreme bias or prejudice in the way that many anti-Jewish readings of the Gospels often do. None the less, it is essential to examine the social location that Jesus inhabited as a Galilean Jewish man and how that identity places him in tension with that of the Syrophoenician woman.

In the ancient Roman world as in our world, ethnic bias was common. The Greeks and Romans had a strong sense of ethnic pride, which fueled their imperialistic conquests seeking to colonize and civilize the “barbarians”^[2]- which was how they often characterized the rest of the non-Greek or Roman world. At the same time, first century Jews also exhibited a strong sense of national pride and ethnic bias- the Hebrew Bible consistently refers to the Jewish people as “chosen by God”^[3] above all other peoples of the earth. Yet the first century world of the New Testament was dominated by the Roman Empire, and both Palestine and Syria were under the occupation of Rome, which only heightened tensions and biases between Jews and those of Greek and Roman backgrounds. This social and political context enflamed ethnic biases and caused a great deal of tension in the interactions between Greco-Romans and Jews in the first century.

Ethnic tensions also played into religious tensions- for Jews, there was little distinction between being ethnically Jewish and being devoted to the monotheistic God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jews believed themselves to worship the superior God^[4] and saw the pantheon of gods worshipped by the pagan world to be inferior. At the same time, the Romans viewed the religion of the Jews unfavorably, as demonstrated by the words of Tacitus who describes them as a “race detested by the gods…. Having a novel form of worship, opposed to all that is practiced by other people.”^[5]

One area of shared bias between Jews and Greek and Romans in the first century is on gender. While it would be inaccurate to conflate Jewish and Greco-Roman conceptions of gender completely, both cultures generally functioned within a patriarchal worldview that viewed masculinity as superior to femininity, men superior to women. While the Greco-Roman world of the first century sometimes elevated the role of women, allowing them to conduct business and enter legal contracts,^[6] for instance, the broad perspective of the culture was that women were inherently inferior to men. Elizabeth Tetlo writes that first century “rabbinic literature expressed an even more stridently misogynistic attitude toward women”^[7] than what was even expressed in the Hebrew Bible as a reaction to some of the advances that were being made in the Hellenistic world. So, while there were certainly differences in the status of women in each respective cultures, both cultures were generally patriarchal.

These three realms of bias- ethnicity, religion, and gender- are at work in the pericope of the Syrophoenician woman in the Gospel of Mark.

Crossing Borders

With this background, we now turn to the pericope itself:

From there he set out and went away to the region of Tyre. He entered a house and did not want anyone to know he was there. Yet he could not escape notice, but a woman whose little daughter had an unclean spirit immediately heard about him, and she came and bowed down at his feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, of Syrophoenician origin. She begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. He said to her, ‘Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’ But she answered him, ‘Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.’ Then he said to her, ‘For saying that you may go—the demon has left your daughter.’

Mark begins by nothing that Jesus crosses over into the region of Tyre, a region in modern day Lebanon, which was inhabited primarily by Gentiles in the first century. Many scholars have suggested that this crossing of the border signified Jesus’ exasperation with his lack of success in Galilee and his desire to begin sharing his message with the Gentiles.^[8]Others have noted that in this border crossing, Jesus flirts with embodying the role of a colonizer- entering a land that is not his own with the intention of making religious converts- even as he himself is a colonized person.^[9]

This tension continually reoccurs throughout this encounter- both Jesus and the Syrophoenician woman are colonized people, but, as we will see, Jesus appears to unconsciously perpetuate the very systems that are at work in his own oppression.  When a people have been shaped by oppressive systems, it is not uncommon for them to unconsciously create their own versions of the very systems that have disenfranchised them. This is what Jesus appears to be doing in this passage.

The Woman’s Bravery, Born Out of Desperation

Ironically, as Jesus enters Tyre, he does not escape notice as he had hoped- he is immediately greeted by a local woman who has clearly heard of his miracle working powers and is in desperate search of a cure for her “demon possessed’ daughter. Mark identifies this woman as a hellenis, which is translated as “Gentile”, and scholars have long debated whether this was a reference to her social status, religious affiliation, or both.^[10] Mark also calls this woman “Syrophoenician”, identifying her as specifically a Syrian who had been Hellenized. The point of this is clearly to identify this woman as an “other”, highlighting the tension that existed between Jews and Gentiles in the first century world. In fact, James Edwards notes that from Jesus’ perspective, the fact that this person is a woman, a Gentile, and a Syrophoenician amounts to a “crescendo of demerit”^[11]. This is not a woman who generally would be thought highly of by someone of Jesus’ background.

The woman bows before Jesus when she approaches him, a sign of deference, likely to both his gender and his status as a religious leader. Mark then tells us that this woman begs Jesus to heal her daughter- this is a woman in desperation, seeking the healing of her daughters suffering. It is hard not to empathize with this mother who is fearful for the wellbeing of her daughter and seems to be out of options to end this torment- and yet, Jesus’ response seems to lack any tinge of empathy. He responds:

‘Let the children be fed first, for it is not fair to take the children’s food and throw it to the dogs.’

There is virtually no way to legitimately justify Jesus’ response as anything other than cruel. Mark has made it clear from many previous accounts that Jesus can cast out demons like the one torturing this woman’s daughter. In nearly every other account, Jesus responds to a suffering individual with compassion, extending healing and kindness to them. In this instance, though, Jesus says “no” to a desperate mother, on her knees, begging for him to do what he has done dozens of times before.

Not only that, but he calls this woman a “dog”, kynariois in Greek, which literally translates to “house dog” or “puppy”, referring to an unclean animal according to the Jewish tradition^[12] and a common slur among first century rabbis to describe Gentiles.^[13] Some theologians have sought to downplay the cruelty of this slur by pointing out that it refers to a “puppy” instead of the harsher Greek word kuon which refers to “wild dogs”.^[14] Despite this, there can be no legitimate interpretation for Jesus’ referring to this woman and her daughter as dogs as anything other than what it is, a slur, presumably based on this woman’s ethnicity as a Gentile.

Jesus’ full response highlights this clearly- this woman is a Gentile dog, and Jesus is a part of the “children”, referring to the children of God. Jesus believes that there is a divine priority for Jewish people, which is an undeniable part of the theology of the Hebrew Bible. This, in and of itself, is not especially troubling. What is troubling is that fact that time and time again throughout the Gospel of Mark, we see Jesus arguing for compassion over legalism, inviting his fellow Jews to embrace the spirit of the law instead of the letter of the law.^[15] In this instance, however, in this woman’s moment of desperation, Jesus chooses to embrace the strictest interpretation of the Jewish tradition and exclude this woman and her daughter from healing. Jesus’ response amounts to a firm, bias-based “no” to this woman’s request, and by all accounts, this should have been the end of the encounter. Except that this woman talks back.   

The Power of Talking Back

The Syrophoenician woman refuses to accept Jesus’ prejudiced response- she uses his analogy against him:

“Sir, even the dogs under the table eat the children’s crumbs.”

These words are powerful- the woman takes on the identity of a “dog” in relation to the Jewish people and appeals to Jesus’ compassion by requesting that even a “crumb” might be thrown her way. In her book “Womanist Sass and Talk Back: Social (in)Justice, Intersectionality, and Biblical Interpretation”, Scholar Mitzi Smith notes the power of this woman “talking back” to a man, utilizing what she calls “sass” as a tool of resistance. There is nothing reasonable nor right to be refused help based on one’s ethnicity, and this woman in her desperation, will not stand for it. As Smith writes, “to be despised because of one’s race (gender, sexuality, or class) is to be up against something unreasoned.” ^[16] This woman holds up a mirror of reason to Jesus’ unreasonable response- especially since he has already healed Gentiles previously according to Mark- and invites him to self-reflection on his unreasonable bias. And remarkably, it works.

While many theologians have tried to argue that what Jesus is doing here is “testing this woman’s faith” (as if that would be any less of a cruel response), Mark makes no mention of her faith at all:

“‘For saying that, you may go—the demon has left your daughter.”

It is indeed her response, her sass, her willingness to push back on Jesus’ bias that seems to move Jesus to offer healing to her daughter. Even his response here seems to lack compassion- Jesus is short and dismissive- perhaps because he is ashamed or humiliated by the way this woman has effectively highlight the irrationality and injustice of his prejudice, but none the less, he does the right thing. He heals her daughter- albeit, from a distance, suggesting that he still viewed this woman, her daughter, and her household as “unclean”. But in this moment, Jesus repents, metanoia in Greek, literally meaning to “change one’s perspective”. In this moment, he is confronted by the most unlikely of people, a Syrophoenician woman, and is provoked to wrestle with the injustice of his own implicit biases.

Obviously, this most literal interpretation of this text poses problems for any reader seeking to read an orthodox Christology back into Mark’s Gospel. Yet for Mark, no such tension seems to exist- Jesus was acting in alignment with his beliefs, which include a bias against “unclean” peoples, and this “unclean” woman uses sass and the logic of inclusion to invite Jesus to adopt a more inclusive understanding of God’s work in the world.

The Christian Response to Bias

Despite this reading challenging orthodox Christology, it offers a powerful lesson for modern Christians, especially white evangelicals. Jesus is confronted by this sassy and subversive Syrophoenician Saint on his bias, called out for his exclusive beliefs, and instead of doubling down and responding with defensiveness, he seriously considers the “illogical logic” of his prejudice and was willing to change his mind and his behavior- or, to use the biblical word, to metanoia, expand his mind or repent of his biased actions.

In this most divisive era of American history where a great reckoning is taking place, it is essential that Christians choose to follow the example of Jesus in being willing to not only rethink our own biases but be willing to work to repair- to extend healing through reparations- for the impact of our prejudices. And for those who are impacted by the discriminatory behavior of white Christians, the Syrophoenician Saint provides a powerful example of what is required to counter Christian bias- to speak up and to be sassy, to hold a mirror up to Christians of the impact of our exclusion, and to demand that the Church expands its vision of God’s work in the world, just as the Syrophoenician Saint did to Jesus. In this pericope, both the Syrophoenician Saint and Jesus demonstrate a path forward for the Church as we deal with our own racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, and xenophobia, if only we are humble enough and bold enough to heed their powerful examples.

---

^[1] Matthew 17:20

^[2] Aristotle, and H. Rackham. Book 1, 1252b. Aristotle: Politics, Heinemann, London, 1959. 

^[3] Deuteronomy 7:5-6, Exodus 19:5, Amos 3:2

^[4] Jeremiah 10:10, Psalm 95:3, 1 Chronicles 16:25

^[5] Tacitus, Cornelius, and Kenneth Wellesley. 5.2-5. The Histories, Sydney University Press, Sydney, 1972. 

^[6] Sarah B. Pomeroy, Goddesses, Whores, Wives, and Slaves, Schocken, New York, NY, 1975, p. 127

^[7] Tetlow, Elisabeth Meier. Women and Ministry in the New Testament: Called to Serve, University Press of America, Lanham, MD, 1985, p. 5. 

^[8] Burkill, T. A. “The Historical Development of the Story of the Syrophoenician Woman (Mark VII: 24-31).” Novum Testamentum, vol. 9, no. 3, 1967, p. 172

^[9] Nelavala, Surekha. “Smart Syrophoenician Woman: A Dalit Feminist Reading of Mark 7:24-31.” The Expository Times, Vol. 118, No. 2, 2006, p. 68. 

^[10] Sugirtharajah, R.S. “The Syrophoenician Woman.” The Expository Times, Vol. 98, No. 1, 1986, p. 14. 

^[11] Edwards, James R. The Gospel According to Mark, Apollos, Nottingham, 2018, p. 128. 

^[12] Exod. 22.31; Prov. 26.11; 1 Kgs 21.23; 22.38; 2 Kgs 9.36

^[13] Iverson, Kelly R. Gentiles in the Gospel of Mark: Even the Dogs under the Table Eat the Children’s Crumbs, T & T Clark, London, 2007, p. 48. 

^[14] Michael Rydelnik. “The Messiah Jesus Was Not a Racist.” Dr. Michael Rydelnik, 20 Mar. 2021, www.michaelrydelnik.org/the-messiah-jesus-was-not-a-racist/. 

^[15] Mark 7:1-13

^[16] Smith, Mitzi J. “Race, Gender, and the Politics of Sass.” Womanist Sass and Talk Back: Social (in)Justice, Intersectionality, and Biblical Interpretation, Cascade Books, Eugene, OR, 2018, p. 39.