The pericope of the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15 has frequently puzzled expositors and perturbed readers. The manner and matter of Jesus’ conversation with her seems stark and even harsh compared to other gospel narratives, prompting some progressive interpreters to cite this passage as demonstrative of ethnocentrism, implicit bias, and even racism. Yet she persists in the face of apparent callousness, seeing something the dulled disciples and superficial readers do not perceive. This paper contends that the immediate literary context expounds the reason for Jesus’ praise and that the embedded linguistic and thematic clues point intriguingly to an Old Testament passage about David and Mephibosheth, a connection quite in keeping with the repeated Davidic emphases throughout the larger literary work.
After briefly surveying the Scriptural usage regarding dogs, the first section of this paper will explore and highlight the particular Davidic framing of the Matthean narrative. While evidenced most memorably in the first chapter, this is certainly not limited to the opening genealogy and birth narrative. The paper will note and summarize the overwhelming usage of the word “David” compared to the other synoptic gospels and discuss some key explicit connections made in certain discourses and episodes.
In the second section, the paper will summarize the immediate literary context of Matthew 15 involving Jesus’ teaching regarding the clean and unclean. The mirror of this pattern in the Markan parallel indicates that the evangelists’ placement of this pericope intentionally continues or contrasts this preceding instruction and builds towards Peter’s climatic christological confession in both books.
The third and final part of the paper will examine some of the linguistic and thematic links between Matthew 15 and II Samuel 9 by tracing selected key vocabulary used in both passages and comparing the prominent mercy motifs. Distinctions between the passages and counterarguments against this hermeneutical parallel will be briefly considered before concluding with an assessment of this particular type/anti-type framing, which seems intended to portray Jesus as the greater Son of David.