Every three years, we hear this Gospel proclaimed. I spend a lot of time the week before studying this Gospel because I'm fascinated by it but I'm more fascinated by the reaction it has on many Christians and by many preachers. Just to recount what we just heard: Jesus and his disciples are in southern Lebanon, in Tyre and Sidon. We know that the people of Israel and the people of Tyre and Sidon hate each other. They still do today. Do you remember about thirty years ago, the two Palestinian refugee camps in that area, Sabra and Shatila, I think their names were? There was a terrible massacre during the Israeli incursion into Lebanon. I mean nothing has changed in that area. Really, it's sad, isn't it? The principles are pretty much the same as they were in the time of Christ. He's out of Israel. He's in the territory of their enemies. He went there to escape so that he could get away to prepare and to be with his disciples before his Passion.

This woman who heard about him, she's a Canaanite or a Phoenician an enemy of the Jews, comes up to Jesus and she says, "Jesus, son of David, have pity on me." "Son of David" is a messianic title. She's really expressing a Christian faith, if you will, but understands the Jewish faith. Jesus doesn't have the courtesy, frankly, to even answer her. He just looks at her or maybe he didn't even look at her. The disciples come up with their standard answer for every problem: "Send her away", "Get rid of her." Then she says, "Jesus, have pity on me." She explains to cure her daughter who has been possessed by a demon. Jesus then says to her, "I have come not for your people but for the people of Israel." That's an insult. And she persists and Jesus says to her that it is not right to take the food for the children and throw it to the dogs. Not even give it to the dogs or to throw it to the dogs. Now if that's not an insult then I haven't heard an insult lately.

What amazes me, as I researched this, are the ridiculous explanations I found. First, in many of them, especially some of the Catholic commentaries, there is no explanation and I can understand that. The other explanation I heard was, "Well, Jesus is having a little tête-à-tête with her. She's witty and so is he. So he gives her a proverb and she gives him back a proverb. There just kind of having fun." Another explanation, "Jesus used a Greek word for a pet dog." By the way Semites don't like dogs. Jews and Arabs don't like dogs. That's a part of their problem.

They say, "Well, he used a Greek word for a pet dog." I don't buy that. Then others say he was kind of "tongue-in-cheek", like "you rascal you". Others say he was testing her faith. Well, he sure was using some harsh ways to do that. I think Jesus said what he said to her because that's what he thought and that's what he felt. Jesus was a Jew and the Jews didn't like the Phoenicians, the Canaanites, the people of Tyre and Sidon. They had hundreds of years of history. These other explanations are intended to make us comfortable about this passage. Anytime anyone tries to make you comfortable about something that disturbs you in the scripture, be careful because what they're doing is they're watering down the scripture. They make it pablum and when they do that we don't get fed.

I think Jesus meant what he said. The problem we have with that is, is that we don't understand who Jesus is. We collectively seem to have a sense that Jesus is like a "Dr. Phil". "He's a very smart man, Jesus. He gives good advice. Tune in next week." Jesus was no "Dr. Phil". Jesus was tough hombre. He spoke the truth and that's the reason after three years of speaking the truth, he was crucified. We have to get in contact with who Christ is if we are to know and to love him. Jesus, in this case was speaking as an Orthodox Jew would. He was a rabbi, a teacher. He expressed the reality of the relationship between the Jews and the Phoenicians or the Canaanites. He recognized the barrier between them and then he dismantled it. He didn't go around it. He didn't make believe it wasn't there. He recognized the barrier and knocked it down. He answered her prayer.

Jesus, at this point knocked down that barrier and brought the faith of the Jews to the Gentiles, as Paul speaks about it in the reading today as well. We can learn a lot from this story, I think. We need to be reminded that boundaries and barriers must be recognized before they can be dismantled. Reconciliation can come, not from a false claim of peace or a false sense of unity when unity does not exist or from some feel-good Rodney King "Can't we all just get along?" nonsense. Reconciliation and peace will come from a realistic understanding of boundaries, differences and problems and a willingness to work very hard to knock the boundaries down.

This is true in all areas of life. It's certainly true in political relationships between nations. You have to recognize the problem before you can solve it. Only Menachem Begin could have made peace with Egypt. If you know his history, he was head of the Irgun which was a Jewish terrorist organization. No moderate from Israel could have made peace with Sadat, with Egypt. The same is true, who opened the door to China, China's enemy, Richard Nixon. He didn't like them. They didn't like him. They recognized that as the correct starting point for the discussions that have born fruit and God knows, needs to bear more fruit today.

This is true in medicine. Don't ever go to a doctor who treats only your symptoms and won't treat the cause of the symptoms. If you do, you're going to be seeing that doctor once a week for the rest of your life which probably won't be that long.

This is true in alcoholism. Ask any recovering alcoholic, "When did you start to get better?" They'd say, "When I recognized and admitted the problem I had. When I had the courage to say, 'I am an alcoholic.', and then seek the help from God and from others to cross the boundary."

It's true in ecumenical relations. When we just get together with all different faith groups and act like we're one, it's a charade and it only leads to more arguments and disunity.

It's certainly true in marriage. If you're dancing around the differences between husband and wife and not talking about the true issues, you'll never have a full and fruitful and happy marriage. I think that's why it takes about forty years to get it right.

Boundaries need to be recognized if they are to be crossed or you will forever be crashing into them. Unilateral disengagement or make-believe peace are worse than nothing, worse than fighting. Fighting's not the worst thing. Co-existing with someone, with tension and anxiety on a daily basis is far worse than a good fight.

This has everything to do with the Eucharist. Jesus broke down that barrier between Jews and Gentiles but he broke down a larger barrier and that was his primary mission, the barrier that separated humanity from God and that barrier is sin and he didn't go around the sin. He took it to himself. Paul tells us in 2nd Corinthians "for our sake he made him to be sin who did not know sin so that we might become the righteousness of God in Christ". Sin separates humanity from God and Jesus Christ took that sin upon himself. He became sin and nailed that sin to the cross and thus reconciled humanity to God the Father. Today we'll use the second Eucharistic prayer for masses of reconciliation. Listen to some of the words from the Eucharistic prayer.

"Father all-powerful and ever living God we praise and thank you through Jesus Christ our Lord for your presence and action in the world. In the midst of conflict and division we know it is you who turn our minds to thoughts of peace. Your spirit changes our hearts. Enemies begin to speak to one another. Those who are estranged join hands in friendship and nations seek the way of peace together. Your spirit is at work when understanding puts an end to strife, when hatred is quenched by mercy and vengeance gives way to forgiveness. For this we should never cease to thank you, never. We pray this through Christ our Lord. Amen."