Although others might have harvested their fields a second time, you could count on the Pharisee farmer to have obeyed the Law by leaving for the poor what the harvesters had over looked. How many times had the disciples heard the Pharisees praising Yahweh, the Creator, with all the energy they could muster? Did any of the disciples have close friends or relatives who were Pharisees? Had a Pharisee ever helped one of their families through a period of difficulty? Taking care of the needy was a prime concern of the Pharisees. As far as the disciples could tell, to be a Pharisee meant that someone was a part of the popular religious wave and that such a person was serious about serving God. (Just think about someone we later meet called Saul of Tarsus!)
So we can only imagine the embarrassment as the disciples blushed, how could Jesus be saying this? We might wonder if any of them took a small step backwards from Jesus as their body language screamed, "Who me? I don't know the man." What we do know is that after Jesus raked the Pharisees over the coals by claiming that although they honored God with their lips their doctrines were simply the teachings of men, the disciples could not take it any longer and launched a question. It was a question which reflects our own values of inclusion and our desire to affirm everybody who is religious and worships God, "don't you know that you offended the Pharisees by what you said?" Matthew 15:12
If Jesus' initial statements were not embarrassing enough to the disciples (cf. Mathew 15:3-9), Jesus then proceeded to make things even worse, I mean really worse as he said, "every plant my Father has not planted will be uprooted" and "They are blind guides. Leave them." (Matthew 15: 13-14) Talk about exclusivistic language! Talk about a narrow viewpoint of salvation! Here were people who praised God and worshiped the Creator, here were people who regularly gave of their money and time to serve God and whose minds were consumed in making God the Lord of every part of their life. And Jesus implied that God would uproot them? I can imagine a bunch of red-faced disciples standing not too close to Jesus and afraid to look up into the eyes of their religious friends. It is uncomfortable to stand too close to Jesus when he makes such strong exclusivistic statements. It is embarrassing to be called his disciple when he steps all over the popular religious movement. In such a situation we might be tempted to become an invisible part of the general crowd, in order to avoid being labels as an extreme right wing groupie.
But before we retreat off of the map, perhaps we need to first ask why. Why would Jesus exclude this group of people who were so zealous to worship and serve the Creator? Although it is true that the Pharisees were diligent about following God's Word, it is also true that their theological program involved recognizing two sets of authority. One authority was God's Word. The other authority was "the tradition of the elders." And when we look at the text, the reason Jesus attacked the Pharisees on this occasion was because not only were they judging Jesus by their tradition, but they were also allowing their human tradition to nullify God's Word. Matthew 15:2-3 The big problem was not their diligent obedience of the Law, but their "additional teachings" which interfered with God's Word.
Don't be naive and irrational by assuming that their human tradition was anything less than sincerely motivated and rational. In fact, it isn't even hard to justify the sincere motives behind the traditional teaching which Jesus attacked. After all, what did Jesus say were the two greatest commandments? (1st - Love God, 2nd - love man) So who comes first, God or man? Now if someone only has enough money to give it either to God or to one's parents, where should it go? Hence, it isn't hard to see how "a theologian" might conclude that one could be relieved of taking care of his or her parents if that money was given to God. Yet, for all of their desire to honor God, Jesus condemned them for allowing another source, a human source of wisdom to act as an authority to nullify God's Word.
Whenever people allow God's Word to be violated because of an appeal to another authority, those people stand hand in hand with the Pharisees. Time might change, but the principle doesn't. Not only did Jesus stand on the other side of the fence from them, but he also can meet us there.
What would Jesus say today if he were to visit us and see us worshiping God? Might he say the same things to us today? What would he say if he heard someone teaching from God's Word say, "well it doesn't really mean that ..." or "we don't have to do that ..." and then diverge into a long explanation built upon using some theological wisdom as a source of authority to nullify God's Word?
So the question remains, "are we following God or holding hands with the Pharisees?" And if we are following Jesus, do we also feel the same embarrassment his disciples felt as Jesus challenges our values of inclusion and acceptance?
Other articles which might be of interest:
For an analysis of Jesus' response to the Pharisaic obedience of the Law check out "Going Beyond Simplistic Answers" or "The Invisible Magic Stamp." For an outline of how the Pharisees and Sadducees handled new ideas and change consult "Entering New Territory Pharisaical and Sadducean Style."
Barry Newton, Copyright © 1998