Catholic Commentary
The Holy and the Dogs — Discernment in Sharing Sacred Things
6“Don’t give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls before the pigs, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces.
Matthew 7:6 instructs believers not to offer sacred or precious spiritual truths to those unable or unwilling to receive them, using the images of dogs and pigs as metaphors for those hardened against the Gospel. The verse warns that pressing sacred truth upon unprepared or hostile persons may provoke not merely rejection but active persecution and hostility toward the messenger.
Some sacred truths are wasted—even weaponized—when offered to those not yet ready to receive them; wisdom is knowing whom to tell.
Typological and Spiritual Senses
Typologically, the verse resonates with the Old Testament prohibition against giving holy sacrificial meat to unclean persons (Exodus 29:33; Leviticus 22:10). The holy things of the altar belonged only to those in proper covenantal standing. Jesus transfers this logic from cultic law to the realm of living proclamation: the Gospel and the sacraments are the new "holy things," and their stewards bear responsibility for their proper handling.
In the spiritual sense, the "pearls" can be read as the deepest mysteries of the faith — the interior life of prayer, mystical experience, the depths of contemplation — which cannot be meaningfully shared with someone who has not yet been prepared by initial conversion, faith, and moral seriousness. Saint Augustine warns that spiritual goods shared with those who despise them are not merely wasted but can harden the recipient further in their contempt.
Catholic tradition illuminates this verse with a richness unavailable to purely historical-critical readings.
The Church Fathers were nearly unanimous in reading "the holy" eucharistically. John Chrysostom (Homilies on Matthew, 23.3) writes: "He who is always gaping after signs, and cannot be persuaded by words, is like a dog… the mysteries are not to be given to the profane." The Didache (9:5), perhaps the earliest post-apostolic text, cites this very verse as the foundation for restricting Eucharistic communion to the baptized — a practice that persists in Catholic discipline to this day (CCC 1355).
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (no. 2охо) affirms that evangelization requires discernment, and CCC 849 notes that mission proceeds "with respect for conscience" and is not "proselytism." The Church is never authorized to coerce, manipulate, or overwhelm in its proclamation.
Prudence, one of the four cardinal virtues (CCC 1806), is the theological framework for this verse. Prudence — recta ratio agibilium (right reason applied to action) — governs not only what to share but when, with whom, and how. Thomas Aquinas in the Summa Theologiae (II-II, q. 47) identifies prudence as "the charioteer of the virtues," and this verse is its paradigmatic exercise in the apostolic life.
Pope Paul VI, in Evangelii Nuntiandi (no. 79), stresses that authentic proclamation must be adapted to the readiness of the listener, calling for "patient and progressive catechesis" rather than premature disclosure of the full mystery. Similarly, the RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults) embodies this verse institutionally: the Church withholds the full sacramental mysteries — particularly Eucharist, Confirmation, and the full depth of the Creed — until the catechumen has been progressively initiated, precisely because holy things require a prepared recipient.
For the contemporary Catholic, this verse cuts against two opposite temptations. The first is over-sharing: in an age of instant content, social media apologetics, and culture-war theology, there is a tendency to hurl the deepest truths of faith — the Real Presence, the theology of the body, Marian dogmas — at hostile audiences in adversarial formats, then to feel aggrieved when they are mocked. Jesus here warns that this is not courage; it is imprudence, and it risks bringing the sacred into contempt.
The second temptation is privatizing faith entirely out of fear of rejection, never sharing it at all. This verse does not justify perpetual silence.
Practically: before sharing something sacred — whether inviting someone to Mass, discussing confession, or opening up about contemplative prayer — the Catholic disciple does well to ask: Has the ground been prepared? Is this person in a place to receive? This may mean first building relationship, addressing felt needs, and accompanying someone toward readiness, rather than front-loading the mysteries. The catechumenate model is the Church's own institutionalized answer to this verse. In personal life, it translates to the apostolate of patient presence before bold proclamation.
Commentary
Literal Meaning and Context
Matthew 7:6 appears within the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7), immediately following the famous warning against rash judgment (7:1–5). This placement is not accidental. Having warned against judging others harshly, Jesus now guards against the opposite extreme: a naïve, indiscriminate openness that fails to distinguish the sacred from the profane. The verse thus creates a dialectical tension that defines the Christian life: neither judgmentalism nor reckless imprudence.
"That which is holy" (τὸ ἅγιον, to hagion) — The Greek noun carries the full weight of consecration. In the Septuagint, this word cluster is used of temple offerings, consecrated bread, and items set apart for God alone. Some early interpreters (Didache 9:5; John Chrysostom) identified "the holy" specifically with the Eucharist, understanding the verse as a liturgical directive. The Didache, one of the earliest Christian documents, quotes this verse verbatim in a eucharistic context: "Let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist except those who have been baptized." This gives the verse an immediate and concrete sacramental application in the primitive Church.
"Dogs" (κυνές, kynes) — In the Jewish world of Jesus' day, "dogs" was a term of social and religious contempt, applied particularly to Gentiles (cf. Matthew 15:26) and, more broadly, to those who were persistently hostile or morally degraded. Unlike their modern domesticated image, dogs in the ancient Near East were largely feral scavengers. They would not appreciate a sacred offering; they would devour it as raw meat. The term does not authorize contempt toward persons, but describes a spiritual condition — those so hardened or hostile that sacred truth cannot penetrate them.
"Pearls before pigs" (μαργαρίτας ἔμπροσθεν τῶν χοίρων) — The pearl was a symbol of supreme value in the ancient world (cf. Matthew 13:45–46, where the Kingdom of Heaven is itself the "pearl of great price"). Swine were legally unclean under the Mosaic covenant (Leviticus 11:7) and had no capacity to recognize a pearl's worth — they would root for food and, finding none in a lustrous stone, trample it. The image is one of category confusion: something of incomparable worth offered where it cannot be received.
"Lest they trample them... and turn and tear you to pieces" — Jesus describes a two-stage reaction. First, the sacred thing itself is destroyed — trampled underfoot with indifference or contempt. Then, hostility is redirected at the bearer. This is a sober pastoral warning: the evangelist or teacher who presses sacred truth upon those utterly unprepared may not only fail to convert but may provoke persecution, mockery, or violence. This is not cowardice — it is prudence.