Matthew 15:5Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Similar practices were observed among creditors; if a lender extended a loan and the borrower failed to repay, the lender might proclaim: 'Korvan,' meaning what is owed is an offering set apart for God. Thus, the borrower found themselves in a position of being indebted to God, compelled to relinquish their debt against their will. The teachings of the Pharisees instructed their children to adopt this behavior as well.

This corrupt tradition promoted by the Pharisees arose from a different motivation. Many individuals, having borrowed money and reluctant to repay their debts, would instead offer it to the priests, allowing the funds owed to them to be utilized for temple service and their own needs. Additionally, the expression, The gift that is from me shall help you, can be succinctly interpreted as follows: He suggests that children be encouraged to say to their parents: ‘Father, mother! The offering I plan to present to God is being expended for your support, and it will benefit you.’ In this way, parents, knowing that the provision is meant for God, would rather endure hardship than consume what has been consecrated.

This implies that when a father or mother in need seeks assistance from their child, it was customary among some Jews to say, “A gift to God is what you would use from me,” as a means of avoiding their responsibility, fearing the law, thereby preventing the devout father from accepting what is pledged to God. This behavior reflects those who attempt to justify their selfishness, while the divine tradition clearly states the necessity to care for one’s parents. If disrespecting a parent, according to God's law, warrants severe consequences (Ex. 21:17), then how much more critical is it to alleviate a parent's hunger, which is a greater plight than death. The Lord discourages empty displays of piety. Many, in an effort to gain human approval, give to the Church what they have taken from their own resources, neglecting their immediate familial responsibilities. First, care for your parents; additionally, extend your charity to the needy and also support the priest from the resources you have in surplus, so that you may receive the spiritual blessings you lack in return, for he who honors will in turn be honored. Remember that in receiving, he also gives, and he does not take as one in need but seeks to enrich you further. Aid the poor to provide them rest, so that by sharing your own blessings, you too may experience solace. The Scriptures instruct to honor parents, but also allow for the necessity to prioritize faith when one’s parents hinder the piety of a devoted soul.

In responding to the Pharisees, the accounts of Jesus’ discussions with them regarding the traditions of the elders are recorded very faithfully by the Evangelists. Mark, who authored his Gospel for Roman believers unfamiliar with Jewish traditions, provides certain clarifications. For instance, he describes what it means to eat bread with unclean hands and elaborates on the Pharisees’ rules concerning ritual washings. Matthew, before inviting his disciples to understand the parable (Mark 7:17ff.), includes a specific account of the Lord's reaction when He learned that the Pharisees were offended by His remarks regarding the traditional elders (Matthew 15:12-14). Both this reaction and the explanation of the parable, according to Mark, occurred privately among the disciples. Variations in the accounts among the Evangelists mainly involve the sequence of specific statements in Christ's address to the Pharisees.

In response to the Pharisees' criticism of His disciples for neglecting to wash their hands before eating, Christ articulated that the traditions of men are often mere human inventions, designed to evade adherence to God’s commandments. For example, the law instructs respect for one’s father and mother, imposing a death penalty for dishonoring them (Exodus 20:12; Exodus 21:17), yet the Pharisees taught that one could declare a gift to God, termed "korban" (an Aramaic term), thus absolving oneself of the responsibility to honor and support one’s parents (Matthew 15:3-6).

This echoing of God’s commandments over human traditions and the meticulous observance of bodily practices fulfilled what the prophet Isaiah once said about his contemporaries: “This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me” (Isaiah 29:13 in the LXX; Matthew 15:7-8). In Mark’s account, these ideas are presented in a different order (Mark 7:9-13; 7:6-8).

If a father asked his son for sheep, a calf, or anything else, the response would be, "What you wish to use from me, I dedicate as an offering to God, so you cannot have it." This led to a dual injustice: not only was God not truly offered anything, but parents were deprived of what was rightfully theirs under the pretense of divine service, thus dishonoring them while falsely appearing dutiful to God (St. John Chrysostom. Conversations on the Gospel of Matthew).

Notes: The words of the Lord as recorded by Matthew find a similar account in Mark, which states: For Moses said, ‘Honor your father and your mother’; and, ‘Whoever speaks ill of father or mother, let them face death’ (Mark 7:10). The command to honor father and mother constitutes the fifth commandment given by God at Sinai through Moses, and the penalty for speaking ill against them is articulated in the laws of Moses. Mark conveys the Lord's teachings regarding both God's command and the Mosaic law in a single passage. Since the Ten Commandments were presented to the Jewish people by Moses, he refers to both as laws given by Moses. Furthermore, Mark records the words of the Lord in a way that parallels Matthew: Is it proper for you to set aside God's command in favor of your own traditions? (Matthew 15:3). Together, the Evangelists illustrate how the Pharisees and the scribes have nullified God's commandment for the sake of tradition. This raises the question of which commandment was disregarded by the scribes and Pharisees. Clearly, it was God's commandment. It is noteworthy that the command to honor parents is recognized as a divine command, and only this was overlooked by them, even as the death penalty prescribed by Moses for speaking against parents remained unaltered. Thus, one could infer from the messages of both Evangelists that the Lord was asserting: For God commanded: Honor your father and mother, and Moses said: Whoever speaks ill of father or mother shall face death. This interpretation aligns the accounts of the Evangelists and clarifies that proponents of capital punishment cannot cite the Lord's words as an endorsement. Since Christ calls us to love our neighbors, including our adversaries, and entrusts us with the responsibility to seek the redemption of sinners, He could not support capital punishment. Such a consequence does not facilitate the sinner's return to the fold of Christ but rather solidifies their estrangement from it.

Yet, the needy require immediate aid, and they might lack the strength to reach out for help. Is it not more about superficiality in worshiping God than to embrace “the greater part of the law... and grace and faith” (Matthew 23:23)? Is this not an imbalanced view of piety, where one’s generous actions depend solely on their financial capacity? Indeed, this is without question.

For God commanded, ‘Honour your father and mother;’ yet you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or mother, “Whatever you may gain from me is a gift devoted to God,” he need not honour his father or mother.’” This means that when parents sought the respect and support they deserved from their children, the Pharisaic interpretation permitted a mere verbal declaration of dedicating certain property to the temple, thereby allowing children to evade their responsibilities toward their parents. What was offered to God or the temple, as prescribed by the law, could not be diverted for other purposes. This insincere practice was challenged by Christ.

God commanded, saying, ‘Honor your father and mother,’ and ‘Whoever speaks evil of father or mother, let him die by death.’ But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or mother, “Corban,” that is a gift to God, by whatever you might have received from me, he need not honor his father or mother,’ thus you nullify the word of God for the sake of your tradition.” The Lord referenced the fifth commandment from the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:12) as well as the stipulations of the law (Exodus 21:16). It was customary among the Jews to dedicate voluntary gifts from their possessions to God, making such vows obligatory (Deut. 23:21–23). According to St. John Chrysostom’s interpretation, the Pharisees encouraged young men to disregard their parents under the guise of piety; when a father requested something from his son, such as a sheep or an ox, the son would reply, “What I would have given to you is dedicated as a gift to God, so you cannot receive it.” This led to a dual wrongdoing: they failed to make true offerings to God and deprived their parents of gifts under the guise of honoring God. Consequently, parents were disrespected in the name of divine obligation, and God was likewise dishonored in the pretense of duty to parents.