New Perspectives on the Nativity

New Perspectives on the Nativity

This page imemiollal~y le.fi blank

New Perspectives on the Nativity

Edited by J e remy Co rley

·" t t\ 1 clark

Published byT&.-T Clark lnte-rnationaJ A Ctmlhwmw Imprint

The Tower Building 11 York Road Lo ndon SEI 7NX

80 Maiden Lm u: Suite 70.J New York NY 10038

AU rights rc-scned. No part of lhis publication mar be re produced or transmitted in :my form or by any means. electronic or mechanical. i ncluding photocopying. r~cording or any information storage or rctric\--al "-ystcm. without pe rmission in \\'riling from th e publishC'rs. Manr Scripture quo1ations contained herdn a rc from the Neh' Rc\is.ed Standard Version L\iblc copyright 0 1989 br the Division of Christian Education of the ~:ation :tl Council oflhc Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. US
' Brown, JJMh. 5i6. :; Ste,'r"n Mason and JeromC' Murphy-O'Connor... Where was Jesus Born ~ 0 Uule Town of Nat.arcth or Hcth l ehem~~ Hibl Ou the" btcncalogy in Matt 1:1-17. ~e lkncdict T. Vi,·iano's chapter in the prcsc:ru \'Olutu c.

" Kingsbury. ~ Birth Narrali,'s. and therefore $Uitabll" as guides. On the vexed astronomical question, he wittil}' concludes. *We can not look for an :mgd th:at h:ts come a nd gont"."

l ufnuq Stt~rii"J si·n a Raymond 1~. Brown

II

send h is h ighly d evdopcd secn~ l service 10 accompany these well-info r med strangers? Brown propo~cs an o utl ine of the o rig inal m s criticism I h at the m agi slo r y can n e ver han : existed in d e pe n dently. b ut ~ is designed with a view toward t he He rod episode. The Magi a re Gentiles; that required some fO rm o f con fron t ~nion wit h l.smd."'?l>This forms th e: b a~is o f h is a rticle. :md h e g in :s a list o f refe re n ces (of variable prob ali n~ value) lo p assages in the New Testamen t wh e re there is a correlation ore,·en parallelism between J ewish and Gcntjle response~ toJ csus.111 main tain ing that thr o ugh out the New Tesl:lmenl h onor d one to J esus f ro m Gentiles must alwa}'S be con fro n ted by ~j ec ti on f ro m IsraeL This d oes not. lo my m in d , scu lc- the question. It wou ld be possible 10 a rg u e by the sam e logic th at there shou ld h a ve been :. stor)' in Luke where the in fantjcsu.s. ackn owled ged by the poor ;wd d estitute shep he rds. was also rejected by the rich. A case can be mad e that this contrast between two personalit ies (or· groups) is typically Matt hcan .lQ In Matthew's own long parables he repeated!)'· o r even invari:\b ly, con trasts good and b ad c h aracters. Furthe rmo re, the contrast in this sto ry at lhc beginning o f lhc Gospel between ho.'>tilit)' from the rcpresen l:ltin:·s o f Israel ( He ro d and h is co urt) and supp01·t f ro m Gentiles is ech oed emp haticallr at the e n d of Matthew's Gospel by the contrast b etween cond em n atio n by Israel (Caiaphas and h is co u rt) and Pilate's insistence on J esus' in no ccn ce. The o n ly real d ifficu lty a bo ut Brown·s recon strucljon of a n o riglnall)' in d e pe n dent m agl story is h is in clusion in it of the magi's stop o ff in J e r usalem and their q ucstion .' 1 In this reconstn1ct ion these a rc- left in the a ir. They arc dear!}' desig ned to d icil the respon se fr01n Herod an d his cour t. a n d h a ve n o sense: apart fro m this. 4

4

4

4

4

4

4

Luke's Language The language of the Lukan in fancy n arrative is m ost p ainstakingly exam ined by C h a ng WookJung, pri ncipally 10 establish ' ''hether Lu ke is im itating the Old Testamenl or tra nslati ng from a Sem itic sou rce, but also to d iscern his exact relationsh ip to the Septuagint (LXX). Is he using the LXX o r simply c:::opr ing a Semitic .style? Earl)' in the book he criticizes Brown for n ot surtkie ntly 4

4

r. Bnw;n. HMJ1, )92. ~ Joh n !9 JO

~

Nollancl, l he Sources for Matthew 2:l-12."

Cfllltniir Hibliml Qouut5. Gouldds dcmonmation (ibid .• 238) of the perva.sivene.s.s of Matthean .style makes il nlrcmd~· perilous to aH.::mpt a n exact reconstr uction of anr underlying oral sources.

12

J.Jnny Uhnsbrougl1, O.S. /3.

d istinguish ing Sem itisms and Scptuagin talis-ms. a nd fi n ally fo r abando n in g the atte mpt to d isting u ish SC"mitisms fro m instances o f precisely Scptuag intal in fl ue nce. r ei r in g too hcal'ily on h i.s dose friend Fitz.mycr's acknowled ged sk ills as one of t he fo re most Aramaic .scholars in t he wo rld .!t2 J ung himsdf begins with t he essential task of ma king a scri('s of impo rlant definit io n s. d isti ng u i:hing ''hard core Septuagin tnlism.s"' fro m ··seco ndary Scp1uagintali.sms.""" The former exprc.o;sions. cou ched in slig ht!)' abnormal G reek. c ::1n be explain ed only as depe nde nt o n the LXX. He dislingu isllcs also · unsu ccessful S ep tuagin t:, li.sms," :l numbt>/. I (New York: Doublcdar. 1991). 22'2, 246. 1 ' J:-mc Schaberg. ~reminil1l Interpreta tions or the Infa ncy Narrati\~ of r-.·latthe"··" in :\ l·ipecth·c m ight suggest Lhal som e of these fea· I urcs a rc not quite ;ts d istin ctly -ch ar acter istic"' of o nly the first l\\'0 c h olpters as Conzclmann su ggests . A particular example is t he special ro le played br l\'lary. Her role among Lhc cle,·e n . th e hro thcn>. a n d th e other wome n in Acts 1:14 is problem:uic fo r Com.clma nn's case. This he d ismis.o;es in a fo o tnote: - It is d if· fic u lt to avo id the susp icion th at AcLo; i. 14 i.s a n interpo lation."' Ne\erlhclcss. Lhe m ajority of r~d action - c r i tic:;t l commentators h ave p lowed a rat he r diffe re n t furm w wit h respect to Luke I and 2.11 [ric Fmnklin comments o n the fun ct ion o f Luke's firsl 1\''0 chapte rs: "They serve. n o l as the first chap· lc r of an unfo ld ing n arrative extend in g to the end o f Acts. b ut as the prologue Lo the two \'Oiumes. They are the statement which t he wo rk as a whole explMmMimJ (Dublin: Dominican Public :at ion~. 199)). ~~9. On sh epherd~ as ineligible Lo gl \'e witness in cour t in the Talmud, scr- Hro\,·n, JJM/1 . 420. 673; Ric: hard A. Horsley. Tlu J. ibcnL.;. allowing our h orizo n s to be expanded a nd our imagin;ttions sharpened . is an approach to th e tex t that ca nno tlea\'c u s dea.achcd o r unmm.-cd. If the contours sketched o ut he re are no1 wholly wide o f the mark. mo rcO\-cr, atle-.tsl two implications arc worth highlig hting . First. Luke's fi rs-1 two chapters can be seen as som et h ing akin to a traile r fo r l l fi lm. in which key scenes and ch~nacte rs arc Oash cd m om e n ta r ily across the screen , a n ticipating th e unfold ing plot bdOre the fi lm it.sdf begins. In particu· tar. Lu ke's b inh story p roclaims that what th e disciple..o; were only ::1blc to sec in ligln of lh e :uccnsion-thal Jesus had been m ad e botJ1 Lord and Messiah (Acts 2 :36)-was alrc-.ld )' the re a t the bcgi1m in g o f his earthly life ( Luke 2:1 1). So too wa.s h is destiny: th e o n e " 'hose b irth brings peace "'ill pro\'o ke .such a ho stile l')'. som e ti mes dcm onst.mtin :ly). resolving d ispute..;. working , \·onders. m usterin g 1roop.s and fighting battles. an:h iv-i ng their o racles in wr itin g, and experiencing visions." 2 Su ch women prop he ts a re found through· o ut the can on o f the O ld Testament. There a rc five who a rc specifically n amed

prcrcrable to call Anna a -prophet" (as in NRSV). rathcr tha n ~prophdcss" (a.s in NAB. NJB. NASB). .so that she is ~een on a par with male prophds. t Wilda C. Gafucy. Dmtghl"'·' rif '' '"ir~m. n~u•.:tt l"mflh~l.f ;,. :h tdntt IJrm:l (Minneapolis: }·ort re.s.~. 2008). 6. 1

It

i~

38

Ba.rbuall}' comes to a prophet.-in the m ids1 of t:n: ryd ~l}' life. i\•fary. like o th er prophets. is full of questio n s and fea r. ( .ike Jeremiah who o~ccted that he was to o young Ucr 1:6) an d Moses who ins isted h e couldn't speak well (E.xod 4:10). Mar}' cann ot fathom ho w the message she hear.s from Gabriel could be p o ssib le' ( Luke 1:3 4). Every p roph et rea li z~s that the task is grcalcr th an their human abi l iti~s. But God a lways gives as..'> ttr.tnces o f divi n~ assistance. To.Jeremia h God ins ists .. Do n ot be :tfra id . . . I am with you to deli\'er you .. (lcr 1:8). For Most·.s. God p m\'idcs a comp;mion. Aa ron. and g uarantees, ~ 1 will be with your mouth a n d "rith h i.s mou th. and will teach }'Oll wh;u you shall do" (Exod 4 :15). So, too. God assu res Mary 1h m u gh Gabriel that t he Hot}' } ibid .. 20. 1

On Mary. sec 1-:lizabcth Johnson. 1ht~\' Our Sisle hold ing the power. pri,·itege, and status. In the Magnifica!. we a lso sec a n examp le of I h e wa)'S in which women char actc r ist icall)' p ro phcsr: '"ith song and dance:. There arc strong parallels betwc.'t:n Mary'ssong ;md th at o f' lVIiri:-tm. h e r n a m e.o;ake. who led the Israelites r. 5« Hrillanr E. Wilson. ~l~ugn.acious l'rcc:unors a nd the Hearer or Peace:Jad.J uclilh. and ~ l ;uy in Luke I:42," Ci~llm/ir 1Ji61~1ll Qmtrlu/y 68 (2006) 436- fM).

1·1 iu zbtth. MmJ. a ud A u na

41

in sin g ing and d a ncing after their escape from the Egyp liatts ( Exo d 15: 1- 21).7 Miriam is ide ntified as a prophel in [xod 15:20 . wh e n she lead s the s inging and dancing with tamb ourine in hand .11 In h er role as p roph e t. Miriam feaclo; I he peo p le to understand their experience of libe ration as a g ift f ro m God and to fun he r im agin e- and thus b e •tblc to achieve- a ne w fut ure in the la n d of God's prom ise.? In a sim il:\r way..Ju d i! h a lso led her people in a ''ictory hymn a fLe r f reeing them f rom t he te1-ror of H olofcrncs (jd1 16:)- li ). :ts d id Debomh. afcer leading t he succes..o;fu l cam p aign against the Can:-tanite King .Jabin Uudg 5 :1-3 1). These kinds of songs a re nol sweet lullabies. altho u gh o ur usu al docile itn:tge of Mary h as take n t he edge o ff h e r wo rds . ..T hC)' h ;wc lma their power to stun a nd o ffcnd."111 The Guatemalan governme nt. however. recogn iz.ed I he ir re\'olmio nary pote ntial and b a nned the public recitation of the Magn ific
11

Sec: .f. K. Elliott. ·Anna'$ Age (Luke 2:36- j i')," Numu" 'fites thirteen vc rS(.'S to a d etailed interchange betwc.'t:n Sim eon a n d Mary, c u lmin:\Ling in Simeon's canl icle (which is reciled by many C h ristians at compline each n ight). he gives Anna on I}' :t brief lhree verses. The re is n o canticle from her thal continues 10 be sung in the church's liturgy. b ut only the third-person repo rt Ih at ~she spoke about the child to all who were looking for the red ('mption of .Jerusalem" (2:38). He re we see Ihe fi rst instance where Lu ke sile n ces the voices o f women in h i.s Gospel. 1\eyond the infan cy n arralive. no woman speaks in the Gospel . cxccpl to be corrected ( 10:38- 42: I I:27-28) or d i.sbdicvcd (24: 11)_1 1 Admitled ly. in the AcLo; of the Aposllc.s. Luke places o n Peter's lips at Penlcco.sl the dedamlion that bolh ~you r .son s a nd your daughters shall p rophe..o;y" (Acts 2:17. c itingJocl 2:28 - 29), and h e tells u s that Philip h;\d fou r daugh ters who were p roph cL.o; (Acts 2 1:9). but he does not prcser\'e lOr us a ny of t he content of wh at 1hcse ICm ale prophets p ro claimed. In Luke's presenunion . it is Peter a n d Paul a n d the mak' d iscip les who are entrusled with the role of public prodatmllion.

Prophet J esus The powerful portrayals of female prophct.s in the infanq n;\rrati\'e p refigu re and prepare lhe w-ay fO r the prophetic mission ofj esu.s in lhc rem:linder of Lhe Gospel More 1h a n a ny o ther e\rangclist. Luke emph:c1sizcs .Jesus• ro le as p ropheL1" W hen Jesus fi rst a n noun ces his m ission in th e synagogu e at Sec: Marr Rose D'Angelo. ~women in l..uke-Acu: A Redactional ViC"\,·:· jmmud of Rihliml LiitfTtllmY 109 {1990) 44 I- 61. Stt :tl1>0 1\uni Richter Reimer. 11llmw i» tht' ;lrt.~ riftlv: .-\fX~.•·Ifr.~: ~• f ;.minbJ Liluomtirm T';r.rpr.-til,.. (Miunc:apoli.\: Fortress, 199.!)). On Mark's prC"sentation of women, sec Susan MiiiC"I', ~l 'hmn• ;,. Mnrk:het occur ( 1:45; 4:19. 29: 6: 14-15; 7:4-0- 41. 52: 9:1 7: 12:38). On Jesus in I he .fohann iue tradit ion. liec": Sand ra Sch neiders. 1\TiUm lhttt lin r Mti.J !Sd in _,..• Encmmun'r~g}~'-.111.• i11 th r Frmrlh Gfl.•-pl'l {r C\'. e dn; NC'W York Crossroad,

200:'1). •• Compare Lu ke 7:2-10 with 2 Kgs 5:1- 14; Luke 7: 11-17 ,,·ith I Kgs 17:17- 2-1 and 2 Kgs 4:18- 37: Luke 9:10-17 "'ith 2 Kif.' 4:42- 44. Jesus is also "taken up" into h~:m~n (l.uh: 9:51: 24:5 1; Acts 1:9) like El!jah (2 Kg.s 2: 11). One d ifT('rence betwt·en Jenl.i and El!jah ili that .fe':Sll.i rt'ruses to -call down fire: rrom hea\l'n" against his opponents (compare Luke 9:54 with 1 Kif.' 18:36-..18: 2 K~ l:9-14). li For further d iscus~i o n or thclic: episodes . .stt Barbara E. Reid, "Wisdom 'sCh ildre 11.fustific:d (~ l l. 11.16-19; Lk. 7.~ 1-35}," in Till' I Ail (~in. Ptlmhi aulisl. 200i}.

Chapter 4

Zechariah 's "Benedictus" (Luke 1:68-79): A New Look at a Familiar Text Lconard.J. Maluf

T he Bcned ictu s o fZcch:lriah.l h c fathe r ofjo h n lhc Baptist in the Gospel o f Lu ke. is a f
NBut )'OU llln. c h ild . will be called proph e t of t h~ Most H igh. fO r you will go befOre the Lo rd to pre pare h is ways. 17 to g ive h is people kno wledge of a saiV- a type thai sta n ds in p artial, thoug h pointed. contr.\St lo t he ..s:.llvatio n "' or the Ch ristian er.t. portrdred inn·. 76-79.11

11

The penpectin:· ofl.uke 1:68-75 would thus deal .,..·i• h sah·ation-history. not christological propheq. We may compare the l.ukan revic"· or Israel itt' history in AciS 7:2-!J:J. li In her imightful essay .. Pugnacious Precursors and Ihe Bearer.of Peact df'vice ofcontm.fl with th e sal\'ation idc~-1 Lh:t l informed Jsrad•s regular undcrst:mding o f its own g lorious p:tst (as c xprcs..o;cd particularl}' in i1s Torah. Prophets. a n d \Vritings). The sam e usc of con t rast here a t work may a lso be detecte d in Luke 4 :24-27. O ld Testament te xts e\•o ked in these words of.Jesu s in the N::t;.t..:lrcth syn agogue tdl of prophcLo; who were scm to persons outside of Israel. T h i.s st mnge case o f .Jewish p rophets com missioned to act gracio u s!)' on behalf of Gentiles is h ig h lighted in Luke 's retel ling through t he device of a n tith· esis: ~lijah :md Elisha were not sent to man)' in Israel wh o suffCr c d s im i· lar afflictions. In Luke 4 it is the c ontrast with the norm. not ' xplicit in th4' Old 7~.dmntmt t;:xJ.s thNIU'tdVI'!S, tha i is d e \'c loped h)' Luke a nd thai cffCcti,·cly brings out th e n o ve It}' o f the universal messianic mission of.Jesus poru.•nd ed b)' t h ese prophet ic stories. Similarly. in Lu kc I :68- 75, Luke spdls o u t w h at is o n I)' im plicit in t he Mauhean te xt that e stablish es the m e an ing of the n ame J esus: ~ H e will s:wc h is p eople (·not from th,i·r 1'111:111-it~s-tu in Old Tt:trt oft he 1\cnedictus i$ a poh·crful nprcssion of the: ..dawn'' (malliPII"') of a ll e\V age of pc':ICe. As is wc:Uknown. the age of Cae~a r Augustus (cf. l.uke 2:)) had been

hailed by Roman writers. J>articularlr Virgil. in $imilarf}• glo\\'ing ccnm. Remarkable par:tlld.s with Lu ke 1:76 - 79 in Virgitian literature h:t\'C yet to bt' fully explored. such a~ Virgil'$ ~Jnt, lines 24 - 4 1. The p:uaJ,'TIIJ>h begin$ with thr words.: -~:.J ru.... :u.m rll' f!u'r~ (-and )'OU. ... holr boy"). addrc:~scd to the chifd Augu.slus, and goes on to contr:Lsl the poem ofjor and light about to uufold with those traditional t'IJics that dealt with ]o\-c:·~ gloomy w~lrs.- The parallels here to 1he: two par u of 1he: Uenedichls. a.s i1tterpn.' ted hen•. arc remar kable. CJ'. a lso Orina... in line 30 and tukc 1 :781 11le~e parallel$ with l.ukc: l:i'6-i'9 a rt' closer ('\ "'ell than those: ofVirgil'~ ort·citc:d IOurth £dogue (4.18-19). which is discu~sc:d br Bro\,·n. 17al' BirrII of Uti! M I'.\'Jiall. 566-10.

53

Is the "Horn of Salvation" (Luke 1:69) an Allusion to J esus? This cxp rc:sio n is dea rly 1he crux of t he in te rpretation o f Ih e Be nt:dictu s as a '''h o le. a n d especially o f i1s first p a rt ( l .u ke 1:68-75). Since the tim e of O rige n, m ost C h ristia n s h ave inte rpreted the ~ h orn of salv;u ion"' as a se lf~evidenl rdCrc nc:.e to C h rist; rarelr wa.s tro u b le t.ake n to j ustifY I his ide tlti flc~ltion . Desp ite this lo ng h istory of inte rpretatio n. th e issu e o f th e refere nce in v. 69 dcsen ·es furth e r consideration. for seve r al re.;tsons:

I . J esu.s is not r dCr red to elsewh e re in the Ne w TesLatnc n t, or in early Christian literatu r e. :\s a "Ho rn ofSal\'ation." ll is not, the r efo r e. sdf+e,·id e n t th alt hc p hr.tse in ques lion is an earlychristolog ical title, as m ;Uly h a\'e sa id . Only if its co nte xt in th e Bene.":llr«.iiou usC'd in the' SC'pluagiHl is rmt but ·horn of"'.'' s.1h·ation ~ (/wn.~ .•iilf.l·ias muu}.

Li!otwrd.J.

Mt~luf

the head of certain mammals, p a rticularly the bull or the r h inoceros. u The imabrery is Lh:ll of aggrcssi,·e strength and (particularlr m ilitary) m ight: the power to defeat a n enemy br uu.c rly d estroying h im .H It is hard I)' self· evid ent that l .u kc would ha\'C seen this as appropriate imager)' fO r lhc s;dva· Lion dcli\'ered by a Messiah. whose mission he d escribes in the second p a rt of 1he Bent;dictus as b ring ing peace (1 :79: cf. 2: 14). Moreover. this mission ta kes p lace .. , h rough the bowcl.s (.tf)/agrhua) of the m e rcy of our God" ( 1:78). Indeed. thc:- Greek cerm :fj)/agdma. or -sp leen." used he re in a nu·t.aphorical scn.se. refe rs to a very d i ffen~ nt intenml bo d y p art. this timc:- taken from the human world. a nd wit h a spnholis1n that is a ntithetical to that of 1h e cxl.e n u l hard\\'";tre amp the h ead of a bull. In fact used m etaphorically, lhe te rm Jj)/agchua implies the d rnamism of heartfelt com1x1ssion. wh ich. a mong other t h ings. inspires tnovem e n t toward forgiveness. reconciliation. and peace (1:77-79)."; 5 . The fact 1h at the expression *ho rn of salvation"" occurs following 1he ,·erb -raised up" (Greek cpit"l?itt) in Luke 1:69 is taken b)' som e to require a per· Slmotl rdCrcnce for I he expression. Indeed . with God as su~ccl. lhe Ycrb cgt:irf'in most frequent!)' h as a person al obj ect in lhe Septuagint a nd New Tesutmenl.u-. Th is in itiall}' p lausible oqjccLion to my thesis m ay be met in l\\'0 complemcmary ways. Flr:st. a ny person named in this verse is (in my view) Om·id r.Lihcr ihan C h rist. Second. the contin uation of the tc xl does not in faCL confirm ll tlirrd~)' pastnwl wfen:ua for the expression -horn of salvation" in Luke I:69. Normally. when the Yc rb - raised up"" has a person as d irect o bject, we expect to find a pronoun-ofte n a rclati\'c pronoun-in the immediately following verse (e.g .. AcLo; 3 :15. 22: 5:30-.31: 13:22) lhat confirms the pe1·.somll reference. This pronou n introd uces a clau se thai. in d icales som ething furthe r ab o ul the person :tlluded to in lhe o r iginal state me nt : God raised up X. tvh.t~ d id such and .such a thing. or/.(} wllom ;t

., For the literal liI}: II LXX {''II"' JfJiril of tllt: king of the ~ I t-d e-$" is object here. with God I Lord] as liU~j «l).

55

promise was made. The: follow-up phrase to v. 69 in the Bcncdictus (fOund in \'. 7 1) is ins tead ll d'!finition ofsalvation as -s;tl\•ation from o ur e n e m ies <m d fro tn thc hand or a ll who h ate u s." This suggests th at i tl ''· 69 the e xpression - ho rn o f sa lvat ion" is inte nded im med iately and primaril)' to C\'Okc (not a person. b ut) a salvalitm lJP~ or 11otiou (associated with. or e p itomized by. David and h is Ho use). whic h is the n spe lled o Ul and d efined in v. 71. To paraphrase what is implied in the horn imagery in Luke 1:69. we m ight then lr.mslalc the ph rase: "a p o,\·erful sa lvation," o r b cllc r still: ··a salvation of formidable JxlftmCJ"' (and not ··a m ight}' S:wior,"' as so oflcn app ears in popular tr.tnslal ions o f the Bcncdictus). This argu ment against a d irectly personal reference in Luke 1:69 would a tso undercut I he o ~jcction th at the term - ho rn" by itsdf doc.s occur once or 1\\•ice in O ld Te.o;tam cnt te xt.o; as a persomtl rdCrencc to a future , messian ic descen d ant o fD:wid (cf. Ps 13 1( 132 ]:17 LXX and possibly Ezek 29:2 1). The o~ cct i on is b ast:d o n fact. but n ot q uite relenuu to our passage. In thc-.sc Old Testament texts. where the term ~ horn " patently refers to tt JH:rsmwl dt'scendmll ofDnvid. such a p e rsonal referen ce is a lso con tinned by an itnmcd i:ncly appen d ed clause con tain ing a pronoun with b ackward refere nce. Thus,l's 131( 132]: I i-JSa LXX read s: - The re I will make a h orn to sp rout for Oa\·id : J han: p re p a red a lamp fo r my anointed . H is e n e m ies I will clothe with sham e." He re we note t he possessive p rono un ~ h is.. (in t he phrase .. /Ji.J e nemies"). which confirms the p erson al rc.•fcrence. through the images of a h o rn and a lam p . in the p rc\'ious ,·cn;e. By way of con trdst, n o such pro noun follows the refe re n ce to - h o rn of salvatio n .. in Luke 1:69. Instead , the expression is expand ed upon through a dt;{tnilitm of ll .mlvllliOJHJPI! in ' '· 7 1. Once again, therefOre, Old Test;unclll usa:;,re is not a decisive guide for the inte rpretation o f .. h o rn o f salvation" in t he synt;n;. of Zechar ia h ·s Be n edictus. More C\'c n tha n by a n y of the f:tcts a n d ;ugumcnts m e n tio n ed earlier. a personal a llusion to j ttsu.s in Luke 1:69 bccom e..o; h igh ly problematic. when ''· 71- which d efines d ivine dclivcr.mcc as ..salvatio n from o ur e nemies a nd f ro m the h a n d o f all who h ate u s ..- is properly seen as c xp laitling 1h e salvation me nt io n ed in\'. 69, a nd perh a ps a lso the · red emptio n " of\'. 68Y II is ex tremdy unlikely 1h at Luke \\'Ottld lm\'e vic,,•ed 1he words o f''· 7 I as a n a p t d efln ition of

li

11le approach of those who interpre t this part of the Bcnct:lictu.s as rderring to Christ ha.s traditionally been to relr on the hypothc:sis of prc:-Lukan origin or to spiritualize the -c ncmic's" rrom ,,·hom Jesus is .suppOSt'd to san~. There is. howc,·c r, nothing in the text that supporLs such spiritualization. On the contrarr, if we .suppose that l.uke himself ili the author of the t:pericnc.-s of li 7:45- 46 ( D:wid 's role con cerning the "tent of wit· ness,. and tJ1c temp le} and esp ecially in Acts 13:22. 36 ( David as implicated in the history of God 's special care for the people of Israel, wh ich began with t ile titne o r their sojonrtl in the land o f Egyp t). I n the contex t of Acts 13:22 David is said to h ave been c h osen by God liJ tliJ all hi,f will. This m eans that David scn·ed God's p u rposes for h is peop le, Israel. in h is own Lime (d. Act..o; 13:36). wh ich s:dtcr

(Pss 40:14(41:13]: 71 :18[72:18]; 88:!">3[89:52]. 10">:48 [ IOG:48J LXX). l.ukc places them in a n O\'erall .S}'tl la X that m o re closely resetn b lcs co mp:•rnblc expressions in narmtWt: poriilJJis of the Gnv:/1. Old '/io.flmmmt. i\•lost pc r tjn cntly. th e open ing p h rase of the Be n edict us C"choes the usage fo und in Exo d 18:10 and in I Kg.s 1:48. I n the first comparab le text, J eth ro. priest and fat hc r·in ·law of Mosc;o;, exclaims: -Btcs.sed [be] th e Lo rd . who has delivered rou out o f th~ hand o f 1h e Egyptian s" (Exod )8:10). Since Lu ke 1:6Sb (~ he visi1ed and m ade redemp tion fo r h is p eop le") mo.st likely refers- and n ot m crc1r alludes- to the E xo d us story, the para lid of I:GSa with lllis Exodus text is remarkable indeed : it d iffers only in I hat Zechariah is more removed in tim e from I he origin al en~n t a nd is the refore gi,·ing :t m o re comprch c n sin: overview of Israel's sah·a rion story th ;m was possible forJeth ro in t he f ra m ework o f Exodus. I therefore lr~m s l a lc v. 68 b: ·· he v-isited a nd made red emption fo r h is peo ple" rather than " he Juu visited . . .... which would suggest ;m event of th~ m :enl past.$ I n :tn oth c r tcxl. I Kg:s 1:48. ~~ sim il:\r fO rmul:'l is used by Da,·id in h is last ho u rs of lifC. confirming that God has indeed b u ilt h im a House. in accord.· ancc with h is promise (d. I C h r 17:10). by a llowing h im to sec h is son Solomon firm ly estab lish ed on h i: throne: ·· Blessed ( be the] Lord th~ God of Is rael. wh o has given today f rom my seed [onej to sit o n my th rone. and my eres witness it." The ope n ing verse o f the Bened ictus thus echoes O ld Testament texL.; in which Israel's God is praised for h is sm·ing inte rve n tio n s- at the time o f the Exo dus. as well as al 1he I ime of the rise of David 's h ouse (d. Lu ke I :69). T h e second part of Lu ke 1:6 8 g ives th~ fi rst of a series of motive clauses, explain ing why b rad's God is p r.•ised a n d g lorified: lw.cause h~ visill'd tmd mad-l' rfflemptiou for his ptrople. The , ,·ords .. Yis itcd" a n d - red emption .. arc not acciden· ta l. 1\oth a re kf1 -.vords \\'h ose rooL.o; are found in the G reek u ·anslation o f the story o r the E xo d us from Egypt as told in the 1-Jcbrc.·w Scrip ture!( (p ri mar ily the Bo o k of Exo dus) and 1h at e p itom iz.e ltiJO tlistin

Nolc how lhis :tcknowlt':dgmcnt of God ·$ ,·i.sH to b rad in E.xod 4:31 kad$ immediatdr lo the ''-onhip of God. ,,·Jlich is the Ihemtand ing (cf. Luke 1:76-79). In Ill)' analrsis . the m e ntion of d eli\'crance from e nemies in v. 7 1 amounts lo a d efin itio n o f the sa h·ation~t ype conHnon to specific momcnLo; of Israel's past histo ry: p rincipalt)' I h a t of the e xodus. and that of the estab lishment of the Israelite monarchy with ));wid.' " The term ..salvation" (:riitiria) in this \'ersc i..o; t hus in p :•rallcl \v-ith the idea cont.:\in cd in .. made n :dcmption .. (\-'. 68) a nd in " horn of s:tl\'ation" (\', 69). The id ea of ~sa l\'a tjon fro m e nemies"' who are 1hreatcned b}' the Da,ridic horn hardly fits t he e r a and mis..o;ion o f Christ. where /t'1Vt!'of e n e mies i.s lhc n e'" a nd re \'olutio nary challenge is..o;ued to fo llowers of Christ ( Luke 6:27-36: cf. Matt 5:31-48: 1 Thes..o; 5:15: Rom 12:17-2 1; I Pct 3:9). On the other hand. the d estruction of Isract•s enemies is integral to the Old Test~~mcn l stories of God's saving presence to Israel in its mome nts of need. as descr ibed by t he: biblical writers. Verse 71 t hus cpitom i:t.\':S the way ~sa l\'alion .. was und en>tood in the tim e before Christ so as bet lcr to b r ing out the novelty of 1he new sal\'ation (v. 78) proper to 1he Christian e r a. A sim ilar contra..o;ting ~ Vanhorc-. nt:inti-rCldc l.uc." l.!l29--JI. T1lis spttactical oluer:ation ~tlso rr"num :s t hc ground rmm a commou .schol:ll'ly Oll inion

!II

jO

that sccs the two parts or the Benedict us as emanating from two unrelated sources. A unitrofauthoohip for th e Be ncdictus is stronglr indicatt.-d IH·rc . C\'tn if my intc-rprr"tation of the- te-xt as a whole rcnmiiiSopen for discussion. l.uke 1:69 refers direct !~· to God's girt to lsracl ol'tht· Oa\'idic Hou.sc as a bulh·ark or sah·ation :aboain~t the nation s e nemies. HoWC:\'r"r, tht" language used in the \W~ also rdkcl~ t>hr:aseology found frt"qucntly in the Book orJudgr"s. in connection with leadr"rs m i~cd UJl br God as ~sa\·i on'' of hrac-1 {c r. j udg 2:16. JS: :'1:9. 15). Hence Luke m:ay also intend a pas..Y ing allusion to this earlier pt.riod or the fudges ewn as he '"'riles d irccllpaboutthe rise or David and hi~ dvnastr (tf. AcL 7:45; ~~~:19).

Li!otwrd.J. Mt~luf

64

d iptrch of salvation-types . .symbo li1..cd by the d i\'ergent rc;o;ponscs of two evildo· e rs hanging one on c~lch sid e of the c rucified Jesus. is dmmaticallr p ortrayed toward the end o f Luke's Gospel. These two tc xL.o;, the Bencdictus in Luke 1:68-79 and the cnu:ifixion nar r.-tin:· in Luke 2 3:35- 43. conta in. resp cctivclr. the fi rst and last cluster: of ·sah·ation" te rminology fOund in the Gospel o f Luke.' 1 The final fo u r vcrs(.'.S of the firs t pan o f the BC"ned ictus (' '"· 72 -75) can b e regarded together as an expa nded ''iew of the sah,ation events a lluded t.o in 1he opening n : rse.s. This view n ow encompas.-:es the prehistory of 1hcse C\'ent...o; in the origin al p romise of God to lsrad•s p atriarchs a nd their aftermath in 1h e p ractice or piety and d i" ine worship. still ongoing in the activity o r th e priest Zechariah himself ( l .u ke I:5- 10). which was in each case the goal of God's sav· ing inter:e ntio ns on lsnel's behalf. Prior even 10 the med iated word of God that came to Israel throug h t he m omh o f its holy p mphcts (v. 70), p roclaiming Go :tl h is own e xpe nse: a nd h e ofre red hospitalitr 10 a ll those who made th eir way to him. proclaim ing the k i n~'"(lom of God . a n d teach ing :til about the Lo rd J e.o;us C hrisl. with utter opcnnes..'· ~ow she puts it startlingl)' im o practice: · ~tary arose in tho se d ays and jottmrytrd with haste in to th e h ill co untry" ( 1:39). She h ns not been co mmanded to d o so. but the h eare r is in no d oub t that sh e is doing exactly what sh e s hou ld be d o ing. The n ext tim e we e nco unter I h e \\·ord is in 2:3- 4, when it describe..; 1h e gene ral effect o f C~tt~sar Aug ustus' dea·ee (-everron e we nt to be enro lled,.). Inte resting ly. and pe rhaps . o;ignifica ntl)'. Luke amids reach ing for this favored verb when h e describes the movem e nt o f the sh e phe rds from their fields to Beth le he m. Instead . we hear the m ..u Cllrt~r

Being Saved from Sins (Matt 1:18- 25) In 1: 18 - 25 Matth e w n ar rates !he concept ion and commission of the yet unbornJ e.sus to carq•out t h is task of s~wi ng the pcople.11 In a d r e;lm. an angel ann ounces Mary's p regnancy to J oseph and inslrucls him. -you will call h is n atn e J esu s. fOr he will sa"e his p eo ple rro 1n thC'ir s ins" ( I:21). The na m e J esus sums up I he b aby's mission or lifC's wo rk. ··to sa ve his p eople from th eir .sins." In ~h l lhc\'' 's view, these sins have bC"cn punished in the fall ofJ cru.salem in 70 C £ .1' Bm what docs this co mmission lnmlvc and how wiU Jesus carry it o UL? Arc t he sins- from which J esus is l.o savc- person;,l. indiv-i dua l. and internal si ns, o r is he conccm cd wilh a ll sin. anything a nd C\'crything in the world Lh;tt is contrary to God's g ood and just purposes, includ ing Roman im pe rial po we r? Verses 18-25 b egin to o ffer som e due:. First of all. the n a m e ':Jesus" is t.he Greek fo rm of I he He b rew n a m e -J oshua"' which m eans .. the Lord sa \-cs."'" Mallhew again assumes that heare rs of the Gospel slory know that t he m ost famo us j o shua in the biblical s 10f1' wm>lhe successor o f Moses. J o.o;hua comple ted the people's lib e ratio n from Eg)'pl. by 0\'e rcoming Canaanite p ower and o cc upying t he Promised Land . This link wilh J o.o;hua and the st rubrglc ove r I he land with the Canaanites s uggests that jesus' saving I ask is much m ore exte nsi\'c than only personal and indiYidual sins. MoreoYe r. t he Su Cllrt~r

T his is Mallhew•s n egative evaluation of the..o;c leaders a nd pan o f h is cxplana· lion for their punislltnCill in Ihe C\'CrltS o f 70 C£ . T h e rest of the c h a p ter o utlines Hcrod•s a u c mpl to d estroy this sheph e rd ruler. h thereby rc \ 'Ca ls a n d calalogs som e of the standa rd ways tha t impe rial pO\~·c rs o pe rate. First. th e re is secrecy as H e rod su mmons t he m agi ( Mau 2:7 ). The n t here is manipu lation as he tu rns p ilg rims into sp ies. send ing the m agi to fin d the child a n d report b ack to him . Third. t here a rc lies as h e declares he wants to -won;h ip him " (2:8) when in fact h e wants to m u rder him (2:13). The n. finally. \v-hc n spies ;m d lies fai l. the re is murde ro us violence as Herod 's soldiers k ill -an the m a le c h ildre n in t he region o f Bethlchcnl two years <m d under" (2: 16). While it is commonplace to im agine (an d to depict in numerou s pa in tings} 1ho woa nds being .sl:mg htc red . Beth le he m and its region were sm all and so t here \vo u ld not have b een many infant.s in this age r.mge .~) To be sure, e \'t::ll one such d e;uh is o n e too m a ny. And !he narrative n oles the ·wailing and loud lamentation" in Oicted on th e popu lation by Herod•s murd erous a nd selfish d cfCnsc of his power and the clite-d01n inated .status q uo (2:18). Here again. Matthe w's quotat ion of.Jer 31 :15 aboul weep ing in Ra mah evokes the earlie r suffering arisin g fro m the Babylonian imr:: I. to Israel a.s God's son (Exod 4:22) being delivered from Pha r;toh 's oppress i n~ and c n slm'ing p ower in Egypt. The re arc \'erbal sim ilarities between the account ofJ csus' return fro m Egypt ( Mau 2: 19 -2 1) a nd Moses• return to Egypt ( Exod 4: 19- 20). A.s wilh t he rcfe re n c He1· chil· dren will not take root. and her b r.mch es will not bear f ruit. 16 She will leave b eh in d a n accu rsed m e m o ry and he1· d isgrace will never be blo tted o ut. \Vis 3 : IG- 19 ( N RSV): tr. Hut children of adulte re rs will not come to m aturity. and t he o ffspring of an unla"rful unio n will perish." Even if t he)' live lo ng they will be held o f no account, and fi nally t heir old age will be without honor. 111 If thC)' d ie young . they will h:wc n o hope and no co n sol:ttio n on 1h e da}' ofjudgment. 1!1 For the e nd o r an unrighteous gencration is grie,·o us. (See also Wis 4 :3 - 6 .) The empire reinforced a pat r iarchal society pre-sided owr by the emperor ~ls fxlll'r patriae. .. father of the fath crl;m d ." The m ale-dom inated im pe r ial ord e r

Wr( rn>u Cllrt~r

90 t~Xc:" rc iscd

co nt rol over d om estic lifC si nce ho use hold s we r e understoo d to be the OOsic u n it o f a political e ntity. Wom e n we re id e n tified in 1e rms o f their rda· Lionships with sig n ificant m ales. Reproductio n was co n trolled so as to e nsure clea r lin cs of d e.scenl. 30 In th e.sc circum sta n ces and g u ided by angelic a p pe arances and d r c;uns (2:13. 19, 22). Mary and J oseph fa ith fu llr and courdgcouslr jou rney as rc fu· gees to Egypt a nd lalt:r return to the lnnd o f Israel and th e n Galilee to p r01ect J esus . Co nsistc n tlr the re is a dose sim ila r it)' between t he lang uage:" employed by the a n gel to instruct J o seph . ;md LIHll whic h occ urs in th e fo llowing \'Cr.sc to narr.Lie J o.o;cph 's obed ie nce. So in Matt 2 :13 . the a n gel command s. ··Get up. ta ke lh e ch ild and h is n1o 1he r. a n d fl ee to Egy p t. a n d r e m ain th e re until I tell you • . ." Ve rse )4 n arrates J oseph 's obedie nce: W Thc n J ose ph g o t u p . too k 1he c h ild a nd h is mother br n ight. and we ml.o Egypt . . ." A sim ila r corrC"spo nd e ncc is evident in 2:20 and 2 1. Throug h J oseph's and t\•la f1··'s actio n s. the s~wi ng pres· c nce o f God r e n :-aled in .Jc.o;us is p rotected and furthe red in th e dan ge rous a nd threale ning wo rld o f emp ire.

Conclusion These opening ch apte rs o f Mall hew's nativity story a re d eeply enmeshed in the Roman im perial wo r ld. Ro me's e mpire is not th e b ackg round f()r a ~rcli· g ious story" th : idem. ~Die Hcrlamll der tdcc de~ tausencnahrigtn Rckhe$ in der JohanMs-Apok:atvpsc."' Utill'li.•dl" Qtmdfft..rhrijl 45 (!937) 1-24: idem. ~wdtwoch c- und tau.sen ~j;ihrij,'l"S Reick" Tllnt t h ~at . fo r millen n ia. had lo s u n· i v.:~· o u tside I he lan d - like Moses. And it s u ited C h ristian ity better with iLo; st:nse o f u n i,•crsal m is sion.

Cha rles H. tohr. "Oral Tcchnitor o f J esu s

~~

John P. Meier. Mrmltn~ (Wilmington, DE: Glazier. 1980) . .369.

(Matt 1:5). and thC"n is conlr.&sted as a model o f sah·ation h)' works t)a.s 2:25) and as a m odel of saiYation br f~lit h ( Heb I 1:30- 31).?5 T h e fan1 lmt Rahab is m e ntioned in Mallhew•s gencalog)' (1 :5) is the a nchor for the basic id ea Lh:H Mall h ew was well awar e o r the com e n ts of Lhe 1\ook o f J o shua. The ract that he chose" n ot to rcndC"r the Jo.s hua~Jcsu s t)'"[>Oiog}' more explicit matches h is general liler:tf}' d iscretio n. He d oes not usc footnOles1hey h ad n ot )'C"l b een im•cnted . He is telling:. story and g i\·ing instr u ct.ions to 1he ch urch. With regard to str ucture he lca\'CS d iscreet h ints in the fin~ con cht· sio n s to thC" g reat d iscourses (7:28: I I: I; 13:53: 19:1: 26:1). but h e does not h it 1he read er over the head. [ven more is this discretion and restraint p reselll in the last three chapters of the gospel. The b ib licall)' literate read er is. howevc1·, f ree" l.o interpret the silen cC"s.

From the Coming ofJesus to the End of the World In the seve n·stage scheme the sixth age ( b e tween the fi rst and second com· ings o f Chr is t} is som e times called the tim e o r the C h urch. t h e time of th e Holr Spirit. the tim e in wh ic h w e live now. In the Acts of the Apostles the r isen C h r ist gi,•e s the apostles the Spirit as a foretaste of the fu ll realization o r the Kingdom, as the glfl for I h is inte r\'al (AcLo; 1:6- 8). To be sure. theologically the Sp irit is present at a ll period s of h istor)'. from creation (Gcn ) :2) to the end of the world a n d berond . But the New Testam e nt presen ts the time: after Easter as a pC"rio d of ~1 special outpou ring of the Spirit ( Pe ntecost). On tile ot he r hand . I he n u mber six can suggest :t tim e of e\•il just befOre the fu lfi llme nt, wh ich is thus associated with the n u mbe r sc\'en. Thi!i could account for some of th e d isappointing, e\'cn sin fu l. aspecLo; o f the l~rst t" 'O thousand )'C"ars. In the SC\'Cn·p a rl sch eme. the SC"\'enth age wou ld in\'()lvc the coming (pamrt· .sia) in glor)' of 1he Son of ?>.hn. His coming im·o lvesjudb'1llent (Mat.L 25:3 1-46) and gove rning the world in justice and peace (Matt 24:3. 27. 3i, 39: 1 Cor 15:23; I Thess 2: 19 ; 3:13: 4: 15~ 5:23). J udg ing here in cludes I he He bre w scn.se of the \'erb Jlliiphat. as in the Bo ok ofj u d gcs. where charismal ic leaders su ch a.s Debo rah . Gideon, and Samso n d o in d eed j ud ge cases. but abo lead in baulc and go\'ern th e people. Read('rs m ay rc:'lsonabl)' ask '''here th i.s SC\'en th age is suggested ln the gene· a log)'· The anS\\'Cr is surprising. If we return to our key str u cturing verse (1 : 17). we recall t h :tt Mallhew ins isiS o n the number fo u rteen th ree tim es. Now \\•hen 5

11tc: joshua l}'pology. alrc:adr fou nd in tlH· IJUl'rt~{ BnrMiN•.• (12:7- JO: 17:14). is b'T~ tlr dt\'t'Topcd bySt.Justin Martyr ( DiflltJgru·wii/J ·nyplu.o49. 70. 75, 89- 90. 113-14). SL lr !f.

101

tile clima x o f «h e woes ( Matthe w 23~ l.ukc I I) a nd ver y likel}' goes back to the lli.sto rical J esus. The verse reflecLo; a pe rspective of cscllato logic:.al jud gme nt in which the whole human h istory of uqjust .suffe ring . fro m Lhc fir.st 10 lhc last murde r o f the innocent in t he Hebre w Bible. will be scl r ig h t by Go d . The \'c r sc tries to e mb race the who le ofhib lic.al h i:>LO f }'· In th is respect it represents a preccd cnl in th e preaching o f J esus himself for t.hc co m p re he n sive h is to rical persp ective lh:'ll Matthe w attempts in h is gc n ca l o~;-y. But it takes it.o; start from Lhc slo r )' of Ad am, Ca in, and Ab el at lhc beginning of G e nesis. So Mallhc w knows 1he sto r y to-o. C\'en t houg h h e c hooses not to m e nt ion it in his gen ealogy. As we co n tinue to answe r the q u estion. whr d id Matthe w o m it t he first two stage..; in the s.che m e (Adam ~and Noah). we may also suggest a pedagog ical reaS<m . Adding the fi r st lh'O su :ps. e ve n with o n ly te n names in each of these h\'O sections. would lm vc made the gcnealog}' too long fo r Mollt hc w'.s taste. IL would have damaged his p atte rn of fOurlecn na mes per sectio n. as we ll a.s Ihe triadic p a n c rn. As the adage .sa)'s, ·All go od things come in t hrees.. (omu~ lrimtm jJ·nfrctum), so Matlhe''' loves lriads.2 ' Mo reove r. b revity is the soul o f wit, and m ;m y regard the gC"n e~dogy as to o long e \·e n in this b riefe r form . Anothe r r eason fo r t he o mis..o;io n o f th e first two stages m ight be i\t p o int leads u.s natura II}' to the d ifficull question: how o ld is the: sc\'CO· age .sch e m e of h istory? Could Malthcw have known o f i t? Was it su fficient ly well kn own that he cou ld rea.o;onablr ex pect some o f his read ers to know a bout it a nd to .sec an a llusio n to it in his gen ealogy? Alread y in the 1920s. l'·. ml Billerbcck p roposed th at 1 Emx}/s Ten Week Apocal}'p.sc: was the do.o;cst pre-Christian parallel to Mau hew and h is most probable source.j 1 We will proceed as though t h is were correct. b tu wilh fear and trep id ation. given the d ifficul ties in d ating and determin ing the ICX I and tran slation of I /::.11och. To be sure . what is properlr characteristic o f the a re mcdicval. the priestly concerns c\•ident in the tcxl lead som e scholars to date the origl· mll composition to the time when 1he tem p le was still stand ing in J e rusalem, tha t is. sometime before Matthew's Gospel was wriHen. The book e xists in two forms or recen sions. In one of these we find plc:mcnt 114; Lcideu: Brill. 2007). ~ Rolx-n M. Grant 1'1 Ill.. Tltr .A.~vttdir filll•.m~. 6 vols (Nt•w York Nd~on. 1965) ::1.128. A simi· Jar scheme ap(X'ars in St. Ju.stin. J>illlt~Kur ra,illt TIJ'fJim Sl A ; St. lrenacus. ,.,d~,.,ll',t.r /fM,~:u-~o 5.28.3: Sl. Hippolrtu~. CtnN"'""'"'.'' tm Ot:rnil'l 4.23: St. Clement of Ale-xandria. Shl1mtrtd~ 6. l:H- 45.

104

Bttlll!dict 7: Fivimw. O.P.

For with hi m the ·d:•y" signifies :• thousand years. And he be~us m e witness (on this point) saying: HHe hold . a d ay of the Lord shall be as a tho usa nd years"' (cf. Ps 90:4). The refOre. child ren, · in six days ..- in six thousand }'Cars··en-ryl hing.. will he fin ished" (i.e .. I he uni\·crse wi11 arrive at iLo; term). Here once again we sec the scven agc scheme. b ased on the same combination ofbiblicaltex!S, bUl witho u t !he labeling of the ages ;u:cording 10 biblical fig· u res or even ts. We ahnosl h:n-c the impression that Matth ew is o rig inal in h is connecting 1he biblical period s wilh named fig llrcs and cvent.s. Hut at least one major church fa th er. St. Augustine of H ippo (354-430). undcrsiOod the fu ll sch e m e und erlying M::allhew's genealogy. In th e time of testing a fle r Abric had sacked Rome (410 CE) <m d lhe Empire in the West was lo tlc1·ing 1oward ils collap se. Augustine \HOle his enormous. rambling meditation on ancient h islory in the light of Ch r istia n fa ith. He tried to make sense of it all in his nin c-hundred·p age CiiJ' of God. Augustjne refers cxplicilly to Matthew•s scheme and completed it with the fi rst two stages. from Adam to Noa h a nd from Noah to Ab rah am. In Books 19- 22 of 111~ City ofGod, Augustine Lreats carefully the m6}, _ l.:.- 86.

106

Bttlll!dict 7: Fivimw. O.P.

To be su n~ . AugusLine was also a genius of huma n dcvclopmcnL:'l psrcho l· ogy a nd Christian spirituality. II is n ot surprising, t he refOre. that h e also applies the seven-age s.chcmc to h i.s own lift- and t hus lo the lin ·s o f othe rs: infa n q. c h ildhood , adolescen ce. roung adulthood , m ature adult hood. ded in e. and o ld age. This seve n-age schem e underlies t he th irteen books o f Aug ust inc's Confonious.'u ll a lso u nderlies 1h e .str ucw rc of Books 15- 22 of 11u City of God. ~ 1 This doub le usc of the seven-age scheme. for personal growth and d e,•dopment as well as for understand ing wo rld h istor y. .sh0\1/'S its fun d:un cntal fruitfu lness. Jn th is way 1\•laHhew's gcn calogr becomes mc:m ingfu l even for o ur .spiritual lives. At least since Denis the Areopagite (sixth century C£.), C h ristian spirituality has p resented t he life o f the graced soul accord ing to a three-age .sch eme: purgative. illuminative. unitive - or. more b iblically. beginne rs. p roficie nt. perfect. Th is .schem e h;t.s influe nced b01 h C h ristian a nd J ewish bcl i ever:s .-1 ~

Commentators from 1907 to 2007 My thc..o>is is d ear: Mauhcw in 1:17 is p roviding <m e xtract f rom a larger precx isLing wo rld week scheme of seven· I ho usa nd -ycar periods ;,san outline of a th eo1o~'1' o f h i.story. Let us 110\\' look at some commentaries p ublish ed in 19072 007 (mo stly Germ a n ). to see h ow 1hey u n derstand Mall hew's genealogy. Johann es \ll,!eiss. ~ll t he beginning of lhc twentieth cenHtry. p roposes thai Matthew•s: three sets of fou rteen gen cr.\lions can be u nd erstood as describing a pre p ar ation. a .splend or. and a decline. The task of the genealogy is to bring fo r th Lhc Messia h .•~ E rich Klosterma nn rccogni7.es a p rinciple o f a week ( l·hbdomadtmpri·nzip) or set of SC\'Cn s. He ob.ser\'CS that the re arc ten generaLions from Ad;utl to Koah accord ing to Gcn 5: l-.;'}2 and te n generatio ns from Noah to Abra h am accord ing to Gen 11:10- 26. This is p icked up by t he rabbinic tt•x t Mi.fhtutlr , \bo/5:2-.;'J. a nd later by Augustine. as we h a\'e .secn:1•1 Paul Billcrbec k stales thal whal carlic:r gen eral ions thought a n d taug hL about t ht~ ti me of arrival of the ~·4es.s i :t h is fu lfi lied in Jesus . ~;.

Ill 11

D. Donee!, Ml :an mcmoriae da n~ tes Col tfcssion~: ltrv•t.. rl..~ Etude twg•u.tin•n~ .33 (l987) 49- 69. Augusle Luneau. Ni..toif7' tilt sulut rhr- IN l'h n d .. rt:gu.,..: /...a tlt>elrim: tJ,., rigi'.~ d•~ rrumtl'" (ThCologk Hil'lelriquc: ?: Paris: 8t"auchesue. 1964). The ma in (>"Usages in Augu~line are /Jr ri1,. JJ-SS.

Davie' and Allison, Sl /ll((ttk•·f"· 1. 185- 88.

Ka ri·H ci n r ich O.s.uucyer. Ocr St~l m m~;tu m de$ Vc rhcissencn: Th('ologi.sc he I mplikatione n dcr Name n und 1...1hk n in ML l.l- 17. N),

o ver a n umb e r of rath~r di sparat~ oml trad itions a nd wrote t hem up into a contin u ous n arrati\'C. Others argu ~ Lh:ll he inherited and ed ited a contin uous nar r:ui,·e. wh ether oral o r wrillcn.7 T h e infa n cy n arratives arc sometimes called m id rash. b ut ahhough !hey sh are m any features with thatjewish gen re. ther d iffCr in a n imporla nt respect: m idrash is an imagin ali\·e. c-reat i v~ . fOrm of exegesis of earlie r mate r ial. Althoug h Malt hew draw':S free ly on O ld Testament material in the creative '":tY characte ris tic of m idrash. his aim was not to explain what h e thought Isa iah or J e remiah m eant. H ~ W:lS co nce rned rather to gi v~ an account of t h~ b irth ofJ~sus Ch r i.sl. Michael D. Gouldc r, having origin ally spoke n of the infancy nar r:Ui\'C:,o; as m idra.sh. J:ttte rly. in his 1989 book on Luke, c h aracte rized th~ir genre as ..e m b roidery.lt$ I sh all use the term ··creat ive historiography" lll)'Self. since to my ear it sounds less pejora l i\'~. Some scholars h ave. how~v~r. d e n ied th at ~h lth cw's in f:o111cy n arrati\'c cmplors c r~ati\'e h istoriography. C h :•rlcs L. Quarles. fo r instance. " 'h ile accepting th:tl the Ne'" Testamen t writers -a ffi rmed a n d u tilized r abbin ic m etho d s of scriptural inlerprct:ttion,"' says that *this docs not impl}' that !he'!)' would reg:trd c reati\'c h istoriogmph)' as a rc."Cogni1..cd and acceptable m ode of communication."!' Creat iw h istoriographr is n ot. h e claims. to b e found in the O ld Testament. the :-.lew Testament. o r such .J~wish sources as J osephus. Pseudo-Philo. the Gem:si.JApocryphon a n d ]ubi/us, for whe n the writers depa rted fro m their primary sou rc~s it '''as n o t because they we re reso 1·ting to i1wention b ut because 1h ey ,,·ere d mwin g on o th) said Ih at Latius. the Ki ng. ''"as k illed by the Troj;ms. That the a n cestor and namesake or the Lal ins should have b(:cn killed by th e Trc-~ans \\'":\S unacceptable. and Virgil fo und h imself driven to the exped ient of making king Latius an cld erl)' and inciTcctivc ruler. who looks on unhappily as younger and m o re violent m en d o the fig hting. At th e end of the Atrtlt"id he is .still alive. to make a un ion with Aenc.·as.11 \ 'V h at Virgil was doing was very .sim ilar to wh:-1.t m a n y b ib lical write rs d id in retelling a stor-y: they m:\de it fit beu e r. on t he ground that its meaning. its lllt$sage. was more impo rtant than the historicity o f all its details . The most obvio us else of such c.reatin :· historiography is I he C h ronicler. H is source (2 Kgs 21) told . fOr example. how bad King Manassch had reigned for fi fty-fin.: rears despite the fact that h e ··sh ed n :ry much innocent b lood. till he had fi lled .Jerusalem f rom one e nd to another" (2 Kgs 2 1: 16). Not a very edifring story. in th e Chronicler's view (he held an o ld -fashioned belief in - short-range re wards a nd punishments'").u He therefOre rewrote the story. making it into a muc h more fitting vehicle for theology.u Ma n assch was a g reat sinner, and for this he was p unished. being hauled on· by the Assyri:m s into exile in B.a bylon, as an object-lesson to the lsraditc.'i. As a further exa mple. I he C hronicler made h im repent while in B~t b)'lo n. and had YHWH bring h im back to Palestine (2 Chr 33:1 1- 13). ManassC"h thus fo reshad owed the fate o f the people. A cas~ of creative h istoriography closer st ill to the- Gospel inf.lllcy narra.· t.i,·cs appears in th e trcal m c n t of the infanC)' of Moses by J osephus, Philo. a nd Pseudo-Philo.11 1n his.4nlitjuili4'softlur.ft<ws•.JosC"phus has an annunciation story. in '\'h ic h God appears in a dream to Moses' father to fO retell his birth a nd that of Aaron. a nd speaks of his futm·c g reatness (A :f. 2.210- 16). J osephus gives Pha raoh 's daug hte r a name (Thcrmuthis). a nd tells us that the boy was 11

J:tspcr Grirfin. Wrgil (l'a.st Mastc:rs: Oxford: Ox lOrd Unin'!rsit)' l'rc:ss. 1986}. 64. Robe rt North. 1-2 Chronk.lc:.s .~ in f"mnu• Ribliml CoNWll'ntury. cd. Raymond E. Brown ...r nl. (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall. r96S). 402-26. her< 405 . ., RobridC'smaid.s. in 25:1-13) \'irginity i:s not at iMUC'. " Schaberg. tllrgitimnrJ. 51- M . T he following quotalion is from p. 67. ~ Schaberg. ~reminist lntcrptl't:alions of thl" Infa ncy Na rrat i n~ of Matthew." j m.mml uf f·;-tNi,.ilt St1~di7: Bro\,·n, flirt/J. 174. 1~ j ohn J. Collins. Till' ,•;r.,.JII.:rrmd t/u .W((r: '17•.: Ma~i((/JJ tiflh.- Dmd SM Srwll.\ cmd Otltl'r ; \ 11dn1t /.U..mtmy( :-lew\Ork Doubledar. 1993). 80 -S:~: cr. Brown, lJ irlh. 195 n. 47.

II 1

~

123 • -The kings of Arabia and S:tba sh all bring g ifts. An d all k i n~"S shall bo w down to him . .. l b him shall be g ive n of th e gold o f Sheba" ( Ps 72:10. I I. 15). • The bed of Solomon. son of David. is ccnscd "rit h myn·/r tmd Jra11k;nau.u> {Cant3:6-7). There are also some awkwa.rd aspects in the const ructio n o f the marra· tiYe that tend to suggest t h at it is a t kast in part fictio nal. In 2:7 we read Ihat "Herod asccrt.ai ncd from t hem the e xact time of the appc:lrancc o f the star." Presumab ly we are to ta ke it Linn ch e star had appe~ucd (two years prc,·iously) .... simultan c::ousl}' with the n :ttiv-it}' or 1:\lc r: he nce in 2:16 th e king's decision to kill bo)'S of two years o ld and under. ··accord ing to the exact time that he h ad ascen a ined fro m the m agi." But why should He rod want lO know the Lime when t he star had risen before realizing that the mag i had decci,·ed him? l.s this simpl)' poor plot-construction on Molllhe w's p art? IL is unclear from 2:9 whe ther the star led t hem from J erusalem to Bet hle h em (rather n eedlessly. for the}' had alread y been directed to go the r e) o r o n lr in d icated the righ t ho use whe n they reached Beth le he m. A fu rther quc..o>l ion arises regarding 2 :12 : ~ Having rccei,·ed a nlcss:\gc/ respo ns.c in a d ream, th ey returned to their o wn country by a d iffere nt route." Reading this state m ent, '"'e ask oursel\'es: Ho w d ocs Matthew kno w about the d ream? He re h e aclS th e part of 1h e ~om n isc i e nt n ar ra tor." seemingly guessing or itwcnt ing when h e needs to .u \;\ 'e hanl now to the m eaning tJl:H the .stor)' will lmvC': h ad for t he e\'angeli.sl. Here the claims of He rod 1h e king (2: I. 3. 9) arc held up to ridicule. It is J esus who will be the t.ruc k ing of the .Je ws (2:2: 27:37). i\: I 1:28- 30: 21 :5). The sociopolit ical outlook of Matthew•;.; infa nC)' storr is ex p lored eJseh·h ere in this ,·olume, 1'' but d esen-cs to be alluded to. if bricO)'· here too. The inte nt ion tostres.sJ esus' Oavidic d escent in the story is quite clear: three times Matthe w e mphasi;-..cs that Be thlehem is in .Jude:'! (2:1 , 5 . 6), as if to counte r the Jewish charge th at jeslLo; was a m e re Galilean who could no t be t he Messiah. because

11

Arc we to suppose that the journcr took the magi h•'O rc:an; or that their departure was delayed? Grorge M. Soa r~ Prahhu. Tltl' Nmrullrt Q.tJI)ILttimu- •'rt t/u lujtmr.' i Nmn:~Hllt'.• t>/ ,.lau 9:j, 36; 12:15; 13:58: 14:9. 14. JO; 21: IS. 45- 46. 1.; Sec Warren Carter's essar in the present \'Oiume.

124

Bt'rturrd P. Robinson

1he Messiah wo uld be :• descend a nt of David {cf. J ohn 7:41. •12. 52). The angel addresses J oseph as ~Jose p h . .son of Oa\'"id"' ( 1:20). Furthe r. as Robe rt. Gun dry obsc::rvt$, the seemingly unnecessar y tripling of Hc:rod'.s d esig natio n as the king (2 : I. 3. 9) ''throws into cont rasl1 he d ('sig n ation ofj csus as 'the king of 1he j .'U l of the feast or December 25. :. Honlcr. Ubmttiott. 5l- !>2. The next in h a 60:6 and J>s 72:15. might ha,·e originally denoted gold-colored incense; cf. Brown. Ho'rth, 176. ~ William A . Falconer. Ci,...tr;: l k.•...-n«ll•t,,IJ<mm'rititr. lkdivint.tlifllu{ l.CL: New York Putnam. 1:

l~>·j ':P-..1 , ,- -11.

125 th at j upitc:"r i ~ the ro}'al planet a nd Satu rn. as th e .star of Saturday. was .someli mes regarded as the star o f t he J e ws"'.;.;; m:l}' have sent them ch e re. O r possibly they kne w th e predict ion m e ntion ed by several sou rccs- ad m illcdly in relation to a som e what later per iod. that of the f~tll o r the Jcn tsalc m tcmpk--1h at a wo rld s;wior (or saviors) would come fro m Judea."' In J erusalem. with some hdp f ro m O ld Testament prophecy. the mag i idt~ll· tified the obscure c h ild of Beth lehem as the figu re wh o. th ey hopt:d. would lead to the O\'c rlh row of weste rn impe ria lism. Sin ce )sa 4 4:24- 4S:2f"J d:uingly sp eaks o f the Persian king Cyrus as YH\,VH 's agent. indeed h is anointed one ( LXX Isa 45: I uses th e Greek tc n n f'.\ : .4 M rJII)tM" 'ljptN~Jgy {Minneapoli$: Forln-:ss. 199:1), 142- 44. ~ So. t'.g.. Donald A. H~lgner. Mlllllun•. 2 m ls (WBC J:SA.B: Dallas: Word. 1993, 1995). l.:S5; Craig S. Keener. A Ct~rwm'.lltrJT.'t iJII lit
1

t

SC' ~Best of the Nch' f'il ms," Cilllmlir. Film ;\t~f•'I!J/i!ll,.r. February 26. ]966, I.

!S

!t

138 Ho,,·ev~r.

one i.s not sure '''h}' su ch hcadwear is neccs..o;ary; its purpose is left unexplained. When the magi c ve ntu:'llly a ppear in the film. the spectato r thus cxp·c cls a n uncommon rend ering of their e n cm1ntcr with t he newborn k ing. The m:•gi fi rst appear with an est.ablish ing shot lh:'ll ''icws the m from behind as they cntcr.Jcrwmlcm. l'asolini retains the C hristian tradition of three magi. \mll (1968), to the d is mc mbe n n cnts of Mrdea ( 1970), and Lo th e mutilatio n s o f Sai.IJ or 120 Nights l!f Sodom (19 7.5). Througho u t much o f P:-tso lini's cine m a. p a r tic u la rl}' in the "'T r ilog)' of Life ." the bodies of lower-ranking people ex h ibit ajorous d isrc~.trd fo r modern wc.o;tcm social o rder, wh ich Paso lin i believed had b een s ub su m ed by techno logy. In thi.s m a n n er. the magi e me rge in The Go.rfNJ as bo d ily signifi ers of an a lle n l:tliYe order t h at co nfro n ts 1he sp ectato r through visu al a nd aural stylistic contamination. The task is no w to tr.mslate Pasolin i's fi lm ic deme n ts into in tcr p ret i,·e escorts lhmugh lhe Le xt of Matt Z:l- 12. Mlklm il Bakh tin's th eo r y of the carnivalesquc provid es the m ost useful framework to address t h is task.l!l

Bakhtin and the Carn ivalesque In h is 19 6!l b o ok. RniJt:J«ir lflld fli.s World, BakiHin ex p lores the carniva lesquc as lite rary expression.411 C arniv...tl is not associated wit h a s pecific d ale as m uc h as it r e p r esents :t sense about t he world. Accord ing to Hakh tin . it is ~a n e xt raor d in arily flexi ble fo r m o f a rtistic \'lsualizatio n . a pecu lia r so r t o f he uristic principle m a kin g p ossib le t he d isco,·e r r of ne w and as yet unseen thin gs." 11 Mo re t h a n an actual re p resen tation of a carn ival. he a rg ues t h ai the carniv:\lesquc is a lilCrary s lr.ucgy th at has been influential d u r ing all pe r io d s of literary d e\'elopm e n l. It flou rish ed d u rin g t he Re n a issance ~ls ~•

P:uolini, N nYiir Caryl Eme-rson ~md Gary Saul Morl'On, Mikl~t~ ii!Jt~k/llm: Crmtitm tif11 p,w.. ir.r (Sian ford, CA: St~i n rord Univcuity Press. 1990). 4:S5-. 1 ' Mikhail M. Bakhtin, "From the Prehistory or Nm·dislic: Discourse.~ in hi.s essay colkclion, TitI Fred W. Burnett. ~Prolegomenon to Reading Mauhcw•s JoweU, M:Ht hc w inte nds h is readers to vie w the mag i a.s ho ly rool.s who :•re ig n onm l within the b iblical v ie w. not wi se . ~., Ho we ver. his e mphasis on t h e narra tive co n straints impo.scd u p on I h e implied reader prevents h im from apprecia ting t he carnivalesque poten tia l that resides in the m agi a.s ho ly fO o ls. In The GoJful they e m b ody strlistic contamimltio n t h a t p roYokcs the spectato r to acli,·e co n templnlio n r a1hc r I han passive reception. In p articula r. Pasolin i's prolific u.sc of d o.se-ups impa r ls h i.s a ffectio n fo r the bod y in his cine m :t a nd in so d oin g calls 10 mind Bak h tin 's e mph:o1sis o n lhe b odily nature of th e c.arniv~ll csq uc . The .surp lus of s m iling faces in th ese dose-ups a lso underscores t h e laug h ing suble xt o f ca r n ival. In this manne r Lhe spccmto r e ncounters t he carni,·•d esque qualilr of s tylistic conu1mi nat ion.

» Naomi Greene, Pin PtliJIIJ Pa.,IJ!ilai: Ci11,.ma ru lfn n y (Pri nceton: Princdon Uniw:rsitr Prl"S$, 1990) . 7 6. Re ported by Vladimir N. Turi)in. a$ quoled in Enu.•r.son. Tltr r iT..t l11w drl'd t nm of .\liklmil /Juk.hti.,, 3 7. ;,; Bakhtin. Ntthfiai.r nmi f U.1 ll'l.lrlrl . 1::15. ~ \\'e may also note t he g rolc:sque humor in thl W~dtC'r L.

·

Reed. IJittlogm:l tifiJu \Hml: T/u /$iblrtu l.ilnnlmY. tlmmlilrg ifl l~tlklrlin (New York Oxrord Uniw:l'sily Press. I99:J). 82.

Tht: Mag; SsorJ t)nvugll slur l":)v-.r (If Ptuolini

147

Reed id entiflc s a co vert ex :-tm ple o f 1he carnivale.o;qu e but d oes n o! explore its presence elsewhere in the Go..o;pds. The refore, he fa ils to u n d erstand Ih e carn i valt~squc also as pote ntial in t he narrative preceding scenes ofJ e.o;us' ta ble fel lowship . J esus• scandalous b c h a\'ior with sinners and tax collcclors c reate-s 1cnsion within the lcxuml world of the narracive . However, it also atlains its capsizing comic force within Ihe wo r ld o f the reader throug h t he carniYalcsquc potential of the magi. They nol on I}' fo resh adow the role of the Gentiles in the futu re of Ihe Ch ristian commun ity, b ut a lso adu mbrate the parodic nature of Ih is community by leading the procession of the festi\'lll o f fools who respond to J esus' m in istry.

Chapter 10

The Nativity in Recent British Poetry A nn Loadcs

Bo th ··poetry" and ··p ro.sc.. (as forms or *poicsis") can stretch the- 1·csou rces of human language to t heir lim its whe n we try to s;•y t h inbrs of which '''e can lm rd ly .speak or write. This m ay especially be the case when some und erstand· ing of the matter in hand is or the g re:ucst impo r tance to us. In the case or the nali,·ity. we are co n cerned with one central tnath. that God's Son Ucsus of N:n:arcth) -was incarnate of the Holy Sp irit and !he Virgin M:uy." A..:. Lc.s Murrar puts it. God can be regarded as the "pocLry caugh t" (but not trapp ed) within a religious trad ition. ~and p ocl'1'· for Murray, offer s the o pportun ity of -whole thinking."l We can also atlcnd to Elizabe th J en n ings• n.::marks whe n re\'iewing a b ook by a Domin ican theologian . Thomas Gilby. The re s he affirms that he lu1d gi\'Cil poeuy wa centrul and high p lace in huma n ex perie nce:· fo r ils .. momc n i.S o r re\'dation" involve I he whole o f a person ~t ran sc ri b i ng or· responding to tl1e m osl imporl ;uu function o f litC-knowing by lo\'·ing and loving by knowin g," grasping an experie n ce ~not 10 p o ssess b ut to be possessed."'? The fact thou a pod is auendin g to and exp ressing a central Lruth o f rcli· gion . h owever. n eve r excuses anyLhing other Lha n one's best wor k. which will in clude Lcchn ica l skill and r h ythmical dcxle rily. thoug h eve n morc imporlanl a rc ser iousn ess of p urpose a nd inte n sity o f fc cling .' J enn ings goes on to asscrl that :01 spccificall)' C h ristian poet, writing o n a cent r;1l 1n 1th such a:"> t h at o f the Inca rnatio n . musl never cease w care, and be pre p :~ red to st n aggle through he r lask. :llert lo the expe rimenu and cha nges of the age in whic h sh e fin d o; h e rself. Since the seventeen th century, in p a rticular. the poel writes nol so much for the pub lic context o f worship. b ut to an iculatc personal experie n ce o f truth . Moreover, not only d oes the poem indeed spring from the whole pe rson. but a

1 I~

Murrar. .. l'otl ry a nd Religion." Col/ntN/ l'o.-rw (Manch...-.slcr: Carcanc-1, 1998), 26i. Elizabe-th Jr nnings. Ew-ry Chrm~iiiJ{ SJurJ~~'· ;\~y.rlirul H:>:fH'rimu ami llu: Mtllri"g of l~m~. (Mancheste-r: Carcanc:t. 1996). 2 1~~-I :J. } Eli·t.abclh Jennings. C/Jri:ll:anit.r m1d l'b Whc-r0

A11n / .ollllcs

the ch ild to be bo rn to Mary. The writer wa.s simply co ntinuing \v-ha t see m s likdr to ha\'e been t he tradition of Christians .since well b efore his o wn lime . that o f find ing in the ir Scriptures. shared with J e wish frie nds a nd n eig hbo rs a nd fC ilo w-wo rshiper.s. the lang uage by wh ic h h e and Olhe r s co u ld express a nd inte rpre t wh;tt was go ing o n in the nativit}'. And ;ts e.al"lya.s t he .second ce nlllry. a repre~>entation of'Jsaiah was w he fou n d in a wall paiming n ear to an im age o fMaryw ilh h e r child o n h e r la p-Christ sprung from the ro o I o fJ esse- wit h Isaia h po inting to t hem! In 1hi.s p ;-.int ing Isa iah ;\lso poin ts to a .sta r n c-arthem, 1he ..sta r out ofJacob .. ( Num 24:17), the star o f Mauhew•s .second chap te r that g uides the m yste r ious magi o n t heir wa}' ( Mall 2:2). So Isaia h t he p ro phe t was also seen a.s Isaiah the c va ng disl, with some two hundred and fiJty quotatio ns from or allusions to the Roo k of Isaiah in Christia n Scriptures. fro m Mouthc,,· to Rc n :latio n. h late r even became a tr.J.· clitio n to write up the who le narra tive of C hrist's life ;,wd iL-: meaning. fro m Nafivity to Last Judgme nt. in t h e \'cr y language of Jsaiah.11 It was :t.s tho ugh. h ot\'·ing g rasped the significance of Christ in co nncc:tion with the p romise of sal\'a tion so characte ristic of !he Book o f Isaiah. C h r istians co uld usc poetry a l re~ldy fam ilia r in o rder to retell! he m ean ing of t he lncarn;ttion. It m ay C\'en he the case t h at Lhe poetr)' o f Isaiah formed b oth Mar y's own unde rstanding of he r role in bringing the d il'in e prese nce amo ng humanity in a n unpreceden ted way. a nd Lhc n fOrm ed J esus' own .strugg le to underst.;md his relatio n· sh ip lo God. his m issio n and d eath. and eve n perh~-1p s Go d g i\'Cn rC"surreclion (.sec lsa 25:7-S}. The Book of Isaiah co ntains the words o f a p o et of t he most p •·ofoun d insig ht a nd t he mos t extraordinary expectation s. For h e sp-oke also o f a muh itu dc o f camels coming from Midian. Ephah. and Sh eba. bearing gold and f rankince nse. proclaim,ing the praise o f the Lo rd (lsa 60:6). 1l was like t he king s spoke n o f by lhe Ps.'llmisl. with kings ofTar.sh ish. Sheba. a nd Seba rende ring trib ute ( Ps 72:10- 1I ) . In Isaia h they are. as i1 were . sile nced by wholt th e)' come to .see in C h r ist: .. Kings shall sh ut their mout hs because of h im : for thai wh ich has not been 10ld t he n\ thcy sh;tll see. ;wd lh ;H whic h the y have not heard t he)' shall understand'" (lsa 52: I5). And the re was t he e xultan t p raise of God to be foun d lalc r in lsoli:th , whe re the poe t writes of be ing clot hcd wil h ·ga nne nts o r salvation" a nd ~t he robe o f righteous ness ." like a g roo m and brid e adorned for the ir m arriage : .. For :'IS th e ea rth brings forth it.s shoots, ;tn d as ~~ garde n ca uses what is sown in it to .spring u p . .so the Lord God will cau se r ighteousn ess a nd praise 1ospring forth b efo r e all the natio ns .. ( l.sa6 1:10-J1).11 4

; This \\·:all painting. from thr Roma n c.al~lcomb in Ihe Churc h of St Priscilla. is noted hr &w rt'r. 11u: Fiji/J GoJfr'l. 65, 76 (depicted in Plate :J). 11 f or instanc~. muc h of tllc: tc-xl of Ha ndel's 1742 oratorio .u.....via!J comC"S from the Book of l.sai:ah. "' }·or the~ thtntr-.\, .set' also lsa 4!'>:8 a nd 1 Sam 2:1-8.

151 Moreove r, Isaiah ackno wledged th~ c reatcd context in '"hich human beings arc set, nol o nly with h is vision o f t he hotr mountain and its resLorcd a nd paradi.sal state ( lsa I 1:6-9). but a lso remembe r ing and recalling ho w inlcrdcpcndent human beings re m:\ in with their animal compan ions a nd work-mates. naming specifica lly the o x and ::1.ss as beasts o f b u nlcn indeed. b u1 cap~l blc o f knowing their 0\"n cr a n d stable ( (sa I:3). Long after Chris I ian Scrip tures h ad bccn idcntjfied and agreed as aUihoritatin :. these a n imi\l companions turned up in p aintings. dramatic repr esentations. a n d ine,ritably. in poclr}'· In addition. bccause IAtkc 's Gospel britlgs sh e phe rds to Jesus' birthp lace. 1he re tnig ht be lamb s loo. in all 1h eir sh ivcring ntln erability, associated so dosdy with 1h e infant thai they m ays.ymbolize him. 10

Mother, Father, and God Vv"c can keep o ther biblical texts in mind too befo re we turn to the poetry eonccrned with the nativity. poet ry th at is n~ry much of our own era. Of cen· tr.tl importance wa..'i som el h ing shared wit h tnost human beings abou t the s.ig· n ificance of children to fam ilies a nd their networks o f kin. Indeed , c h ild ren h ave been especially s ignificant whe n 1h e divine b le.o;sing of ferti lity wasjeopar· d ized in poor communities by inadequate fOod a nd scarcity of resources. a nd incviL:tbly untreated a nd untre::1tab le infections in those of uncertain he;tlth. If we atlend to the h igh mortalit}' rate fo r both women and n c\d>Orns in a ll but the most privileged .societies. '''e can refre..'ih ou r sensitidtr not o nly to 1he way in which d ivi ne c reativity was d eemed to be p rese n t in the "gen e.o;is" a nd growth of th e ch ild in h er or h is mother's womb (e.g., J o b 10:10: Ps 139:13- 16: Ps 22:9-JO- from the PsaJm attributed to Chris t in h is last agon )'). but also to the point 1h at a child's being brough t safi::Jy 1h mugh b irth. and being nurtured and reared. yielded insight into God's own compassion ( Isa 42:14: 46:3-4). T h e rdationship between t he nascenl ;,wd born child and mother is .surdy the p r imary model of altruism and intra-depend e n ce in h uman societies. In scr ip tural texts. it is ;\lso th e p r imary model for lhe coopcmtion of divine grace and huma n wcll·bcing as expre;o;scd in fe n ilitr. There wen~ c h ild ren born b lind. deaf. mute. or oth e r wise d isabled. b ut none of t he rl;o;ks e ilhcr to mothe r o r to child dcstrored this conviction. Re ing safely born lo t he one whose h eartbeat had been k nO\l'"ll hcforc b irlh. able to breathe and ..'ittck le. bcing g ive n lo o n e's mot h e r to feed and nurture. jus! able to fOcus eyes to eyes o n he1· toving . .sm iling. sing ing. and talking face. learning w sing·along. being

tt

See ··Agnu5 Dei'"

in Denise Levertov. .'i.t/,ylnl p,..m.J (Neh·cas.tk upon Tyuc: Blooda>:e Books. 1994), from ~MaSi lOr the Day or StThomas Didrmus,"' 17f•- 8t, e:spedally p. 181: ~ i5 it implied that ~·v i must protect thi.\ IX:J"\'trsdy weak / animal. wh()S(' munle".\ nudg-ings / suppose there is milk to be round in us? / Must hold to our iq hearu I a :shivering God?'"

1!'>2

A11n / .ollllcs

cleaned up. kept s.afC e noug h , seen throug h bt"ing sick. slc:t"plcs.o;, runny-nosed. d isruptive, d e manding, and im possible lo p lease (just like a n adull!). eager. c urious. c 1 ~j ori og play of a ll kinds, m a king things fo r fun . learn ing companionship and cOJwiviafily in the .slm ring of food . leam ing how lO lcL go of hurLs and h arms so t ha i life could g o on-alii h is mig ht b e invoh·cd as a ch ild grew into t he .. image of God ... as well as becoming of a n age lo learn Scripture b)' hear t a nd s ing it to othe rs. Moreovea·. it is no accid e n t that images of a b reastreeding m alernal figure a rc so ccntr;tl in human art. not least in C hristian a r l and poet ry. since if a c hild's b irth-mothe r could not feed h im or he r, o r if she d ied. the child '.s \'e r r lifC dep e nded upon another woman being a b le and willing lo d o so . He nce it remains a cen tral im age of human a n d divine charity. Impor tant to o is the father•s ro le. Being a "fatht"r" -a.s e ve n the unn;u ttc-able but a wesomely n am ed ..Ado n ai,. could somc1 im es be addre.o;scd (1sa 63:16)lmd to do \1/ith c re;Hi\'il}'· in timacy. a n d h ope. a nd above all \\'il h the und(·rstan d ing t hai Adon;~ i was self'-l"e \'Caled as me rcy (Exod 3 :14: 34:6). So we need to keep Joseph in m ind, and argu-ab1}· g ive him far more a lle ntio n than has been commonly Ihe case, d espilc the e fforts ofsom e fro m the seve nteenth century onward. WhatC\'t:'r may h ave bc:en take n fO r gr.tnlcd in biblical o r olher ti mes and places abou1 a father's p resence in his fami ly. it cannOl always be so take n fOr g ranted to d ar. And it would be easy to break a man's h ear t if he Lho ught th;tt the one to '''ho m h e was betrothed had been u n fai thful to h im . So ir J oseph is to embody in h is own dislinctiYe way t he d i" in e c.omp as.o;ion. bo th to a vu ln erable young woman a n d to the child she bears. h e n eed s Ih at promise from lsaiah.11 As is now widely a ppreciated. Mat! hew's Gospel gen ealogy :•ssocialt"S J esus with som e vulnerable, margitlal. pos.o;ibly scan dalous . a n d ind eed unc:otwentional wo m e n. b ul.Joscp h. we may suppose. h ad never thoug ht h imself likely to be invo lved with o n e such. 1? So h is consent to Mary•s well-being a n d tiHlt of he r ch ild is cruciUnt (~carpenter"). the c:upenler on this occasion sends d~ewherc: the: centurion \\'ho has come to order a galloh·s: ~M:trylitood in thr- door. curling cold hands like: Jca\'Cli I Round Ihe fn. il of her womb. I 'Hurry,' lihc s.,id. ·tet the sa\\. sing. I Soon it \\·iU be time for the cradle to rod: Ill} ' boy' .. (p. 184). On the women named ~u .Mailhew's gc• ~~al ogr. sc:e. e.g.. Irene Nowdl. M Jcsu.s.' Gr~ I ­ Grandmothc·rs: MaHhew li F.our a nd More, Cath.,1i.. .fiib/iml Q •rm1t soon as thq were a b le likd)' to be involved in securing food a nd clot h ing and shelle r as The star becomes not just th e star o f t he m agi. but a star fOr us. however myste rious t he ··:-.fothing" of d i,·in e be ing. Like the write rs of the Gospels. t.he poet enables us to make something of t he:" C\'e n t for oursci\'CS.

George Mackay Urown. "The Golden Ooor: The T hree Kings," Cnllnt.-d J»c>,.HU, 149- !'>0, here 150. S(_-c a·l$0 ~Yule'" (pp. )50- !'> I): ~A PMm ror ShelterH(p. 1!'>2): "Stan: A Christmali P:.nc:hwork" (pp. 209 -12). r. Oa\'id Gascor ne. HThe Thre-e Star11: A Prophecy." s•.·/ulnii~Mu (London: Enitharmon. 1994). 102-103. here 103.

!l'i

159

Mary the Mother ofJ esus The Gospel writers. ho we\'Cr, have a bm·e a ll to make som ething of t he kind of p erson ~hry, the m o the r of J csus, must ha\'e been by the timc o f J esus• con ceptio n , as '''ell as wh at sh e ' """'-'S 10 beco m e. Ye t we know liltlc o f her as h er own p erson. so 1.0 speak, from the g limpses we h ave o f her in the Gospe ls. leading to her presence in the midst of.Jcsus' d iscip les in AcLs 1:14 a fte r h is rcsurrcction· recrcation by God. It is im portant to keep in mind lhe tr~ec tory of Sp irit·p rcscn cc L h e r :ll !he beginning of Luke's Gospel lhrough to the Sp iril·presencc t.o he r a n d J esu s• disciples in the new community be ing fo rmed in Acts. Grace and Sp irit do not leave her. whate\'er he r o wn struggles. as she too becomes a d isc:ipk o f h e r son. The grccl ing o f G:,brid to he r acknowled ge..; he r as graced indeed. e ve n before the concep tion of her son . Yet we n eed a nmc of caut io n he re. fOr som e theologians h:wc treated her as so cntircJr d ependent on d iYine grace. d islod g ing a ny hint of h um:m self· assertion from her r esponse to Gabriel. that hcr pe rs~:mal huma n d ignity is elim inated. Rather. we ma)' regard he r as indeed a p ro fo undly g raced person. so she can be thought of as b ringing e\'er)'lhing th:tt she was as a life· g i,·e r to her response to Gabriel's c:Jmllcngc. Sh e cannot be d escr ibed as so subse rvient as to make unintelligible either her response to that or J esus• own response to God . It is as lhough she l'eCO\'Crs herself in l.he presence of the a ngeL n o lo nger somewh:H int imidoucd as she m::1y ,,·eJI ha\'sage.o; concerning M:uy arc fo und Rc m cmbc r Mary in the b ook. When she withdrew from her family to :t place in the cast ''and took co ver from them, We Sl'lll to her Our spirit. which appe~ucd to her in the fo rm of a n o n nal person. I$She said, ··) take refuge in t he mercifu l one from you if" you fear Him."" MIJ-Ic said. ~ 1 am onJy a messenger from )'Our Lord, to g ive you a righteous .son." 'l"Sh c .said. WHow can I h ave a son " 'hen n o man has touched m e and I hav~ not been u nch ;tste?" ·~ 1 1-le .said . *T ints il i.s. Your Lord .said. ·Jt i.s easy for Me. We will m a ke h im a sign fO r people and mercy fro m Us.' It is a n accomplished facL" 1;' He re there is no referen ce to Zach ariah or Ihe b irth o f.Jo hn. The location i.s also d ifferent because the scene d oes not take place in the mihmb. Rather. Mary gOt's off lo a place in lhe Ct she simply went off with no precise d estin ation. \Vhalevcr he r location, she is soon visited by an angel, wh ich is d escribed as God's sp irit in human fo rm. This m ay be the m ost distincti,·e aspect of the p as· sage. p a rticularly in light o f the m essage h e' brings 10 Mary. He d escribes h is m ission as ~to giYe you a rig hteous .son," whic h could theorcticail)' mea n that, in h is now-huma n fo rm, h e will help b r ing about the pregn a n cy in the usual war. Rut Muslim comm e ntators h a\'e never considered this l.o b e ;t correct way of reading the text. The virginal conception of J esus is a cent rat article o f Islamic faith. a nd this pa.ssag roots in ord er to quench th e family's tJ1irsL. 11; This text comes from somet ime between the sixth an d eighth ccnlttr ies a nd is probablr b ased on the Prolevangr.Jium ofjame.r and I he /njan9 GtJJfrel ofThom tu.11 When we compare this Qur ';.m mate rial with the Ne''' Testament trAditio n s surrounding jesus~ conception an d birth it is clear t h at the Qur'an texL.; p ut emphasis on Mary being ;tlonc at critical moments in h er life. In pan icular. Joseph's ;:1bsencC': is striking. He p lays ;t kC)' .supporting role in the New TC"slamcnl. but in I he Qur'an it i.s n ot e \~ n.stated thal.shC': is engaged to be m:lr· r icd at the time ofhea· preg tlan cy. She ha.s withdrawn a nd is a ll nJone whe n she conceives and gives b irl h to .Jesus. We have seen that Joseph appe~us in other Islamic I rAdition.s. b u t in the Qur'an Ma ry i.s a young woman ' "ho goes through I his experience by he rself. The absence o fJo.seph. her .soliL:tt")' status. ~md the m irAculous pro vision of food on se\•eral occasions make apparent Mary's total depend en ce': on God in t he Qur•an. What happe n s to h er in the mihrab. whe n sh e withdrAws, a nd undt~r the palm tree indicates t im ! sh e d oes not n eed huma n help because God is p rolccting he r :tnd is responsive to her needs. This requires complete sub m is..-.ion a nd t rust on llcr p art as sllc faces d ifficult circun1stances ~\ l011 c . b u1 not without d ivine help.

Issues and Implications for Muslims and Christians In two frequ enLI)' cited pa.ssagc:s the Qur'an rdCrs to Mary as a sig n. "Remem ber the one who g uarded her chastity. \t\t'c: breathed Our spir it in1o her and made he r and h er son a .sign to all peop le" (21 :9 1: cf. 23:50). The evidence from the Qur•:m a nd other Islamic .sources indicates that one imp ortant way Mar)' fun ct.ions as a sign is through her obedience a nd t rust. Because she believed and did not doubt. God•s 111cssage. she ga,·e birth to J csu.s. who i.s revered :t.s a

•• Sulci man A. Mourad. ~rrom Hellenism lo Christianity and Islam: The Origin ofl he ~ 1 m Tree Story Conc.-rning M:arr and Jc:~us in the GOlipd or P~cudo·MaHhIitn· Cathol ic Dialogue," Jrnmll'lloff.'nrm. ~ l dc/ Chri..tmm.: n 'll..,t Nmlly 11tJ/'fJfflnl? (London: Fontana. 197.1). 1 On t hi~ alip:-tid aboutje-sus. he was to s.ar nothing that could be taken as a denial of tlle nistenc:e of S:mta Claus! U turgirn

183 In fact, the proclam;tlion is o ften subn~rtcd by t hese notion.s a n d pressed lo collu de '''ith th e m. Ho w oftC"n a rc clergy to ld a ro und Christmas time by their p a rishio ners: "We ll, it's really fo r the c h ildren. isn't it?" Ind eed . in many Catholic communities in Britain th e liturb'1' o n C hristmas mo rning can become. in C"ffecl. a ··C hildren's Muss," like a MSchool Mass" for the younger c hildre n. I haw even .seen :01 communilr w h ere a school·organ izcd nat i,·ity play replaced Ih e g ospel rc;tding . the homily. and the profession o rfaith . The n the cele bration can becom e about toys that came with 1he d awn, rathe r than a bo UI 1he One who visits us like the da\\'"11 fro m on high. But sh ould w e see the problem:ot of cdcbrating t hC" maivit)'· a nd recalling o ur stories about t he n ativity, as pro b le ms in the quest for lhc historical .Jesus? Pe rhaps we have becom e so fixa ted o n the g ospels a.s - h istory" tiHlt we h :wc forgouen thai. like o ur a n cie n t texts. our cele bratio n really belongs to the liH.trf:,'")·?

What Do We Remember Liturgically? For Christ ia ns. liturgical remember ing h :l."> th e fuller sen.sc of rm mmli'SiJ: celcbra•i ng a his10rical reality that is con stitutive of our .. no w,. as the church. Hence, b efore we can re fl ect o n how we re me mber the nativity. we must look at what we re m e m ber liturgic:•lly. Thi.s m e mory. as a g lance at :my .. relig ious" Christmas card .s how~. is far more co mplex tha n a ~s i mple" recollection of -facts." I place these l;uter word.s in quotation m a rks because even the briefest introduction to p sycholog)' .shows that me mory is r a rely simple: and that -races" in our past are as elus ive as subatomic particles. Ne n :rthd ess. we as huma n s h il\'C a very .stro n g a ttachment to t he notio n thal all m emoq• can be unders!Ood b)' a n alogy to the re port to the police o ffice r after a robb er)': ~T he ,·an o utside the house thi.s mo rn ing was white." In the C hristian memory o f J esus· birth. fo ur mC we b and the n p resen t the m as a single. a p pan:n tly cohe r e nt, im age. Thus it is filling to have a feast o f.Jo ac h im a nd Ann e bt;ca u.sc we h :wc feast s o f Mar y and t hese feasL.; (suc h as t he p o st-b ib lical notio n of h e r Presen tatio n in the Te mple)1' fit toge the r as relating to :t s ingle p e rson. and t h at person is lin ked into t he nacivity sto r y b r be ing a central acto r wilhin it. We e m imagine th is by a nalogy wit h a co llection o f snap.o;ho t.s 1h ;tl have th e cohe re nce Lhat the)' come in the seq ue nce o f b eing ta ke n . a nd collectively h ilen d id no1 fore!'ec 1hat this Vigil Mass would within a lew yean~ turn into a major ct"lebration in many communities wht"n it bee:a me in the late 1970s an ·anticipation" of the obligation for Christm:ll' Dar. With this deve-lopment, the c:hoice ofg0'5pd passage became-e \·eumore noblematic because congregations often wanted a ~short· celebration and a l.so wished to 1car the Christm3s story. l'he result is that t he~ are \'Cry fe\,. cons.rc:g:ttion.s that C\'Ct he-ar lht" genealogy text. O n these p:utoml proble-ms. sec Thomas 0 Loughlin, l.it•tf~.tinll R.rM>•wt.\for A til"'"' m1d Cllmtmoulid•{ Dublin: Columba. 2006). (74-86. The Lukan gc-ncal· ogy (3:2~ -38) docs not appear in the Roman Catholic 1ec:t ioua'1'· except as an :tltcrnati\-e gospel for.Januar y 6 if the Feast of the Epiphany is c:elebrated on 1he rollo\\·ing Sunday. •• On 1he deri\<Jiion of the-J rSSC" Tree from Isaiah ll, sec John F.A. S:aw\'er. TJu• 11_))11 Gn•Jid: ls.t:riaJ: •'rt lltt HiJllJ')' "'{ Chri..tinm'ly (Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University l'ress. 1996).

l

74-SO.

If

I!.

Sec O'toughlin. /.itm-gim/1\nmHu~JnrAdt..wl t.md Clwbllffrl.rlitfl'., I !)6- 67. According to R.D. Cole-, ~Bet hl eh e-m ." in f.'udmrm.~· Ditti<JJurr_v f>j tht WIJIl.r Piaa:J: Th,. l>t-tu f'tion.1 of m1 hr.n•lar Mrmk ont/J,. l~r••tum oft"" B ib/kat IJrruntt ( London: T&T Clark. 2007). 229-:~2 . The c:an• orJ esu.~· l>$rth appears as rccrnt1r a.~ 2007 in the: film TM Nativity Slory. directed by Catherine Hardb·ickt'.

189 the ProttJtrllltllgtlimn we h an: almost the reverse situation : its '' h i storic~ ! " b its a rc being g radually fo rg o ltc n ;n b ut the th cologlcmtonNmgr.U"m an:, howc,'t'r. ~till part of the memory of e;Lstern Christians. since thcr :trc depicted in common I}' found icons.

190

TJumuts O'Loughlin

psychology. nllh cr than ) it is a lso "to day" that ~a n e w light has d awned ." while the effec:L of l.hc Incarnation. coming to s h a re in the di,•i1u : nrd.s or images. since: God is ~d\•'J}':S greater tha n our undt'"ntanding.

Contradic-tion$ ;ue a d uded.

1imrJQrll.f ~>/llu nt 7~xls Pseudo- Ph ilo: Aulhor (perhaps flrsl Ct:ntUr)' C~~. forme r!)' id en tified wit h l'hi1o of Alexand ri;*) of a Buo/{ of Bibliral .4ntiquititrs retelling the scriptural story from Adam to o~w i d

Q {saring$ source:): 'rnad iLion o f J esus' teachings pn:scf\'ed in Matth ew -59. r...haggio n i. 13runo, ..'T he O rdinary Made Extraord in~nr,H Com1mmio 31 (2004) 8- 15. r..lalina, Bruce J .. a nd Jerome H. Ncyrcy, '·Honor an d S ha me in LukIcon \12 Nath;m 62 N:az:iritc 9. 129 Noadiah 3S Nooh 93- 95. 100. 104. 106, 166

215 Numbers. Rook o f 9. 9S. 122,133.

150. 174 Nunc Dimiuis 13 Odysseus 16

Origen 53 P:Lolini. Pier J~olo 132. 136-4:J Pcnt:tteuch 95- 97 Pepysiatt Go.1~l HarmMy 14 Pc:~er

42. 4-4

J>Jmmoh 40, 60. 88. 114-15. 127. 176 Phili)> !he C"\