"Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you." Matt. 7:6
This verse has been interpreted in many ways, the only common principle seeming to be that the verse stands independent of those surrounding. It is read as a statement on the reception of the tenets of faith by unbelievers, and thus the care (and ensuing protectionism) that should be practiced by evangelists and apologists - the inherent contradiction with the whole notion of evangelism notwithstanding.
That contradiction should not be passed over. In fact, I think it is sufficient reason in itself to reject that interpretation of the passage. If the Good News is not the string of pearls that the swine trample, then what is? Let's first recognize that the passage contains two images rather than one. That one effect is sought by the example of the two images should not lead to a confusion of the two images. For I think that the distinction of the two images focuses Jesus's point.
First we have "do not give what is holy to dogs".
Without offering a scholarly citation, it strikes me that "what is holy" refers specifically to the sacrifice in the temple. This is in contrast to reading "what is holy" to be vaguely "the gospel". This passage is intended to be a striking piece of imagery that would be shockingly profane to any Jew: the temple sacrifice thrown to the dogs. The clear implication is that things that are offered to God should not then be profaned by removing them from their sacrificial role. Once consecrated, "what is holy" must be treated as such. It cannot be thrown to the dogs!
The second image has two parts. First, "do not throw your pearls before swine". In essence, I think this half is intended to echo the preceding image, but specifically highlighting what is of value (that which is consecrated). This is to say that value is determined by orientation toward God, the contrite heart and the sacrifice of thanksgiving. This command is subordinated to "do not give what is holy to dogs" because it reminds us that "what is holy" is what is valuable. The two commands together suggest that "what is holy" is the heart of our value and that we should remain oriented to "what is holy", i.e., that we should not confuse things by turning away from what is holy, casting the pearls before swine.
In the latter half, Jesus says, "or they will trample them underfoot and turn and maul you." The swine now have agency in the story. We might read this to mean that the unbelievers to whom we have spoken the good news will turned on us in ridicule. In this way, we might read this as a sociological point about the coming persecution and the dangers of preaching holiness in a fallen world. But reading this in such a way forgets Jesus's other, and clearer, teachings on persecution which do not imply restraint for fear of consequences. Again, I find this sufficient reason to reject such a reading.
Instead, I think we must read this as a statement about losing our orientation. Again, Jesus prompts us with the image of the dogs so that we are in a frame of mind taking holiness for granted. With the swine now, he suggests that by losing our sense of value, of holiness, we will only provoke destruction for "the way of the wicked is doomed."
Thus, we should not read this as an "us and them" passage in which we are the believers and they are the unbelievers (swine). Rather, I think this passage reminds us that there is such a thing as the "holy" and that this is the very heart of value. And further, it is our orientation. In Paul's writings this will be manifest again,
"Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship" (Romans 12:1).
So that if our bodies are "what is holy" we then "die to sin". We are consecrated to a life of holiness. Our orientation is always toward that sacrifice of holiness. To confuse that orientation is to throw "what is holy" to dogs, for in so doing we sacrifice ourselves to the world, to money, to selfish glory, anything but God. We take what is a sacrifice to God and throw it to the dogs.
That is one half of the story about this passage. If in fact the passage stood on its own as an aphorism, this might be sufficient. However, Matt. 7:6 happens to come just after verses 7:1-5 and just before verses 7:7-29. I hope it is no intellectual leap to suggest that this is more than a coincidental fact!
The situation of this passage is that of following the passage on commanding that we "judge not, lest you be judged." This passage too has an interesting interpretation. Without launching into the particulars, let me just claim rather dogmatically that this passage does NOT mean primarily that we should not name the faults in our neighbor. It may also mean that. However, I think the context of this passage implies a different primary meaning that is more bound up in a practical scenario. Note that Matt 6:19-34 is overwhelming concerned with "economic" considerations, i.e., possessions, their procurement, and their use. I claim that all of chapter 7 continues this theme.
At the end of Ch. 6 Jesus has just concluded his exhortation not to worry about tomorrow (lillies of the field, etc.). Now Ch. 7 starts off with "judge not...". Surely, you say, this is a new thought entirely? Perhaps, or perhaps Jesus has just launched into the particulars of how such a society must work. Notice the passage, "and the measure you give will be the measure you get." We often read this to mean we will be forgiven in proportion to our forgiveness. Again, this is not out of line with Jesus's teaching. But in this context perhaps it is another form of "it is better to give than receive." Maybe Jesus intends the literal exchange of physical goods. Why? If he is in fact still talking about economic matters, then perhaps he is attacking the practice of witholding alms (or witholding from anyone who asks) based on the perceived virtue of the one begging. This seems to be in keeping with "give to everyone who begs of you" from 5:42.
Furthermore, the "ask, and it will be given" passage can (and should?) be read as an injunction to ask for necessities without reservation. Ask your neighbor, for God works also through men! But what of "Do not give what is holy to dogs..." surely there is no reasonable economic interpretation to this? In a way, no. I think that this passage belongs in continuity with the judgment passage.
When Jesus tells us not to give what is holy to dogs, we must hear this on the heels of "No one can serve two masters...". What is holy is put in the exclusive service of God. God is its one master. Jesus then exhorts us not to worry about tomorrow, not to store up for ourselves treasures on earth, BECAUSE we are in the service of the Holy One. We are the consecrated sacrifice. Jesus then outlines a temptation not to give to those in need (7:1-5) because we see in them failures of virtue. At this point he snaps us back to attention by reminding us who we serve. We are "what is holy", we have been called to this "neediness", and yet we use the occaision of our neighbor's neediness to sin against him. This is to give the devil victory in what should be a holy encounter. Rather than serve our neighbor, we judge him.
Herein lies a crucial point of the sermon: we are not holy because we have no possessions, but because we love one another. Do not use what has been offered for holiness as an occaision to sin. Do not throw an invitation to love your neighbor to the dogs.
This passage stands out, rightly, because Jesus is trying to snap us to attention. He is not talking about what is not practical. He is talking about the intersection of the practical and the transcendent. He is talking about the meeting of God and man which is the sacrifice of our bodies so that we might die to sin and live in Christ. This passage is, in a thick way, about the incarnation because we must understand what the incarnation means for terms like "practical". For the supernatural has usurped the practical by the very nature of Christ. We have been given bodily entrance to the kingdom, and the means to help build it. This passage is a reminder of this depth in the midst of Jesus teaching on the very "practicalities" of the kingdom.
So, let us be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect.
Amen.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Pearls Before Swine
"Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you." Matt. 7:6
This verse has been interpreted in many ways, the only common principle seeming to be that the verse stands independent of those surrounding. It is read as a statement on the reception of the tenets of faith by unbelievers, and thus the care (and ensuing protectionism) that should be practiced by evangelists and apologists - the inherent contradiction with the whole notion of evangelism notwithstanding.
That contradiction should not be passed over. In fact, I think it is sufficient reason in itself to reject that interpretation of the passage. If the Good News is not the string of pearls that the swine trample, then what is? Let's first recognize that the passage contains two images rather than one. That one effect is sought by the example of the two images should not lead to a confusion of the two images. For I think that the distinction of the two images focuses Jesus's point.
First we have "do not give what is holy to dogs".
