Introduction
It
appears that the primitive preaching focuses on the death and resurrection of
Jesus rather than birth and early life of Jesus which may be obvious in Mark
and Petrine preaching. However, the infancy narratives could be the result of
growing interest of early Christians in the early part of the life of their
saviour. This paper is going to discuss the nature, purpose and major motifs of
Matthean infancy narratives.
Nature of the Matthean Infancy
Narratives
1. Scholars like R.H. Fuller, Brown
identified that infancy narratives include pre-Gospel traditions and the
Christological reflections of the early church.[1] Matthew used this
pre-Matthean tradition along with citation from OT by using his unique citation
formula and the implicit motifs of OT stories particularly Exodus event.[2]
2. Matthean infancy narratives are written
from the perspective of Joseph. Matthew linked Joseph with different aspects of
the birth story of Jesus in chapters1-2. Joseph depicted as righteous man, one
who guided by divine dream to protect Mary and Jesus, son of David and one who
follows the law. Thus, Joseph portrayed as a typical pious Jewish model like a
patriarch. B. Witherington
III notices that undue emphasis on Joseph may indicate the Matthean concern to “demonstrate
how Jesus became legally a son of David and/or is part of the attempt to show
the respectability of Jesus’ origins.” Further, he opines that the submissive
role of Mary in Matthen infancy narratives may indicate author’s reaffirmation
of the traditional Jewish idea of male headship and female subordination,
perhaps because author had a Jewish-Christian audience in his mind.[3] The
Matthean infancy narratives seem to be male centered.
3. Matthew uses five Old Testament quotations in his
infancy narratives. As he does in the entire Gospel, Matthew shows that the
birth of Jesus is fulfillment of the scripture. This fulfillment motif
indicates that Jesus is the Messiah. He used his typical formula: “to fulfill
what was spoken by the prophet” (with slight variations) in his four quotations
in the infancy narratives. He directs his stories into such quotation at the
end of the episode and shows the fulfillment motifs.[4]
Herman Hendrickx points out three characteristics of Matthean fulfillment quotations:
Firstly, the typical Matthean fulfillment formula which contains the passive of
the verb ‘to fulfill’. Secondly, quotations have commentary function. They are
the part of the narratives. Thirdly, quotations in the infancy narratives have
mixed text form which closer to the Hebrew than the other OT quotations in the
Gospel, which tend to follow LXX.[5] Further, the quotations in Mt 2.5-6 are not
introduced by the formula but they serve the motif of fulfillment. Thus, early
Christian concern to show that scripture fulfilled in Jesus is an operative
motif in Matthean infancy narratives.[6] In addition, these
fulfillment motifs indicate the didactic and apologetic purposes of the author.[7]
4. Matthew uses personal names and
geographical location in his infancy narratives in a distinguished way. Mt 1
dominates with personal name. He talks about the genealogy of Jesus. Mt 1.18-25
talks about the story of divine name that gave to Jesus. Mt 1 also stresses the
Davidic line behind Jesus (especially in vv. 1,17). Moreover, Mt.2 is dominated
by geographical names. The common denominator for the quotation in Mt 2 is the
geographical names.[8] The quotations in Mt 2.15
and 19 have obvious focus on geographical locations. The geographical emphasis
in Mt 2 may give answers to the questions like Is the Christ to come from
Galilee? Has not the scripture said that the Christ is descended from David,
and comes from Bethlehem, the village where David was? (Jn7.41-42). Matthean
answer might be Jesus, born in Davidic line and divinely led from Bethlehem,
the place of his birth to Nazareth; so that “He shall be called a Nazarene” (Mt
2.23). Thus, it may be concluded that
the Matthean infancy narratives focuses on the important names and geographical
locations of the messianic event.[9] Moreover, the narratives
serve the apologetic and didactic purpose of the author.
Purpose of Matthean Infancy
Narratives
Above
discussion already gives glimpses regarding the purpose of the Matthean infancy
narrative. In addition, flowing discussion gives more information on the same.
1.
The infancy narratives can be served apologetic purposes. It can be defensive towards non-Christian followers of John the
Baptist. There are scholars who find ani-Docetist tone in infancy narratives.
Further, infancy narratives are response to Judaism who viewed the Messianic
claim of Jesus as illegitimate. OT stories like Joseph who saw the dream went
to Egypt and escape of Moses from the slaughter of kids by Pharaoh are parallel
to Joseph, the legal father of Jesus and Jesus who escaped from the king who
killed male children respectively. R.E.Brown thinks that such parallels and
reminiscences might have served as couterapologetic against Jewish stand on
Jesus.[10] Further, it might be
polemic against the Jew’s accusation of illegitimacy of Jesus.
2.
Matthew has Christological purpose. W.B.Tatum notices that J.D.Kingsbury
proposed this. It views that Matthew desires to portray that Jesus as the royal
Messiah and uniquely Son of God.[11]
3.
Tatum opines the genealogy along with the superscription and subscription
(1.1-17) gives an introduction or prologue to the Gospel.[12] The evangelist’s prominent
interest in the genealogy is the genealogical origin of Jesus which gives him
the royal Messianic credentials. The genealogy indicates “The book of the
origin of Jesus Messiah, Son of God, Son of David, Son of Abraham” (1.1). Tatum
opines that the genealogy epitomized by the titles “Son of David” and “Son of Abraham”.[13]
4.
Tatum suggests that Matthew demonstrates the genealogical and geographical circumstances
in the first section of the Gospel wherein author incorporated infancy
narratives are the fulfilment of OT prophecies of the Davidic Messiah.[14]
Various
Motifs in the Matthean Infancy Narratives
1. Genealogy: Davidic Origin of Jesus: The
genealogies in Matthew and Luke have disagreement in different points. It may
be best to understand genealogies are theological statement than the biological
reports.[15]
Ancient genealogies associate
the hero with prestigious ancestors to elevate the status of the hero but
Matthew uses genealogy of Jesus to portray the significance of Jesus in
connection with biblical story.[16] The
genealogy indicates that Jesus is related to the whole Israel. Jesus is the
fulfilment of Israel’s history, a history carefully guided by God to its goal.[17] Warren Carter suggests that theologically the
genealogy indicates, “God’s purpose as paramount and locates Jesus in relation
to God’s previous and ongoing salvific relationship with Israel…. The genealogy
co-opts and reframes Jewish traditions and history to serve its Christological
perspective.”[18]
Mt 1.1 says, “The birth record of Jesus
Christ, son of David, son of Abraham.” The genealogy emphasizes the Davidic
origin of Jesus. Matthew portrays the status of Jesus as Messiah by tracing his
line through David, the kings of Judah.[19] Matthew
also attached origin of Jesus to Abraham with aim to justify the large flow of
Gentiles to the church. This theme recurs in the Gospel (Mt.8.11;3.9). The
designation of Jesus as son of Abraham may indicate that Jesus as seed of
Abraham by whom “all the nations of the earth shall bless themselves.” The
special relationship of Jesus with Abraham and David is a pre-Matthean concept,
which already appeared in Paul in 50s.[20]
One of the noticeable
things in Matthean genealogy is inclusion of the four names of women: Tamar,
Ruth, Rahab and Bathsheba. There are few proposals regarding this.[21] Firstly,
these women are someway associated with sin or Gentiles. Matthew tries to
indicate that Jesus came to save sinners and Gentiles. Secondly, these women
are foreigners and their inclusion shows that Messiah is related to Gentiles by
ancestry. Thirdly, there are some commonalities between these women and Mary: four
women have something extraordinary or irregular in their union with their
partners but they became the part of Messianic lineage and they became
instruments to achieve God’s plan.[22] Like these women, the
scandalous situation of Mary (pregnancy out of wedlock) turned to the part of
God’s plan and she became the instrument of divine providence. Though these
women were the victims of the circumstance, they later came under the
protection of the patriarchal structures and so as here Mary came under the
protection of the actions of Joseph through which she made legitimate.[23] Finally these women were
margins and socioeconomically and culturally underprivileged but had trust in
God. Further, the patriarchal structure was against them. These women are
examples of righteousness. So that God breaks barriers and works among the
margins.[24]
2.
The Announcement of the Birth of Jesus (Mt1.18-25): The
pattern of angelic announcement of the birth of Jesus seems to be similar to
the pattern of popular sorties of announcement of the birth in the Old
Testament.[25] The focus of the
Mt1.18-25 is the Christological dimensions. Joseph was the agent for the
Davidic origin of Jesus, the Messiah. He became the legal father of Jesus. It
means, “Davidic paternity is to be transferred not through natural paternity
but through legal paternity.”[26] The Davidic sonship of Jesus comes not through sexual
relation but acknowledgement of Joseph about divine intervention behind Mary’s
pregnancy. Joseph used the right to name the child and thereby he became the
legal father. Further, Matthew clearly mentions
that Mary became pregnant through the Holy Spirit. The divine sonship comes
from the Holy Spirit. Brown remarks that “two parents have harmonious role in
making Jesus who he is. Although they do not physically in the begetting,
Joseph is the one through whom he is begotten as son of David, and Mary is the
one through whom he is begotten as Son of God.”[27] This apparently shows
Christological interest of Matthew. Brown argues that the kerygmatic
proclamation of Jesus as Son of God begotten through the Holy Spirit of the
early church is reflective in Matthean infancy narratives.[28]
Matthew talks
about virgin conception in his quotation from Isa7.14 in 1.23. The Hebrew word
for virgin alma which denoted a young
girl who reached the age puberty and thus marriageable. However, it does not
put any stress on virginity, though the ethical and social standard of the
Israelites implies virginity.[29] R.J Miller says
the Isainic prophecy nothing related with virgin conception or coming of the
Messiah, but concerning immediate future of Isaiah’s time.[30] However,
Matthew applied this verse to the virgin conception of Jesus. It seems that his
concern is to show Jesus as the Messiah in Davidic line according to the
expectation of the Israel and fulfilment of such expectation in prophecies than
the virginal conception which might be lacking in Jewish messianic expectation.
At this juncture it is relevant to point
out that one of the major concerns of Mt.1 is polemic against the Jew’s
accusation of illegitimacy of Jesus. E.D. Freed notices that Matthew puts
following three arguments in his defence against Jew’s accusation of
illegitimacy of Jesus:[31] Firstly, he includes four
names of women in his genealogy who were controversial in the society but
contributed for the benefit of the community of Hebrews. Secondly, Matthew
chooses Greek text of Isa.7.14 (the virgin) over against the Hebrew text (the
young women) and clearly states the intervention of the Holy Spirit in
pregnancy of Mary. Finally, Joseph accepts Mary as his wife and legal
paternity. It directs against Jew’s accusation and criticism to show that Mary is not mother of
illegitimate son but a women with virtues whose pregnancy is God’s will to give
birth to Messiah.
3. The Visitation of the Magi (Mt.2.1-12): The
motif of Davidic lineage of Jesus continues in Mt.2.1-12. Matthew cites Micah
5.1 and 2Samuel 5.2. Micah speaks about a Davidic king from Bethlehem. The
citation from Samuel gives explicit force to Davidic origin of Jesus. Further,
Brown argues that the implicit citation from Isa.60.6 and Ps. 72.10-11 in
Mt.7-12 implies role of Jesus as son of Abraham in whom all the nations shall
be blessed.[32]
The
visit of magi indicates that gentiles will be added to the Kingdom of God. Also
it probably implies the joining of Gentiles in the Jesus movement in the days
of Matthew.[33] On the other hand, even Jews (priests, teachers of
the law and entire Jerusalem) came to know that Messiah was born, they did not
have interest but they likely joined with Herod in making plot against new born
king. Thus, Brown suggests that Mt 2 lights the Christological dimension of the
conception of Jesus and response of Jews and Gentiles to that revelation as
rejection and recognition respectively.[34] Further, the negative
response from Jews in Jerusalem in Mt.2 anticipates the passion narratives.[35] Fuller observes that the role of Herod and fate of the innocents
foreshadows the crucifixion and death of Jesus.[36]
However Mt.2 gives more than the motifs
such as “rejecting Jews” and “believing Gentiles.” Richard Horsley and Carter
explore the political dimension in Mt.2. Jerusalem was centre of power. The
oppressive nexus between the Jewish aristocracy and Herod, a vassal king of Rome
turned against the new born king who seemed as a treat to them. Horsley suggests that though the Jewish
aristocracy and Herod rejected the revelation, common Jewish people longed for
liberation from Herodian exploitation and tyranny through the birth of the
liberator, the true, divinely designated king.[37]
The term magi had
different meanings in different times. The term magos in Greek often refers a magician who might be astrologer or a
dream interpreter.[38] The
magi were Medean priests who specialized in interpreting dreams. After the
conquering of Medea by Persians, they accepted the religion of Persian and
became Zoroastrian priests. They were a caste of highest ranking
politicoreligious advisers or officers of the Median and Persian courts.[39] In
the first century, magi referred to experts in Eastern wisdom and science which
include astrology, astronomy and divination.[40] Though they are
supposedly learned people, Carter notices that their knowledge regarded as
foolish and unreliable by several.[41] When
Rome dominated the East, Magi who associated to East started to long for
liberation from the alien rule. Thus, Horsley suggests that recognition of new
born king Jesus by magi appears as the aspiration of the eastern people for
liberation from the western oppressive rule.[42] The
term worship or proslynesis is a
political term which indicates one requires prostration when s/he greets a
ruler.[43] Magi did obeisance to Jesus. It is an act of paying highest respect or
homage, and submission to a king, a political ruler; it expresses political
importance of birth of Jesus worldwide.[44]
Further, the
Matthean story of star shows the ancient belief that new stars and comets
broadcast messages from the heavens. Story seems to endorse the appearance of
the new star was thought to herald the birth of a new ruler.[45]Brown and several other
scholars suggest that Matthew might have influenced by the story of Balaam
(Numbers 22-24).[46]
In this story, Balaam prophesized about the raising of the star out of Israel,
which is understood as Messianic prophecy in the first century Judaism. The Balaam story has same plot as Mt 2.1-12. Further,
Matthew might be making the points that magi got knowledge of Jewish king most
probably from their astrology but their knowledge seemed incomplete which might
be supplemented additionally by the Jewish scripture (Mt. 2.4-8).[47]
4. Herod Tries to Kill Jesus (Mt2.13-23): This episode has three scenes; each shows the
fulfillment of the OT prophecies in the early life of Jesus. Each scene
centered on citation from OT. The noticeable theological motif of this episode
is the way in which Matthew evokes the history of Israel particularly exodus
events in the story of Jesus. The similarity between Moses and Jesus and
between Pharaoh and Herod shows that Matthew appears to echoes the Exodus story
as the background for the infancy narratives.[48]
The citation in 2.15 from Hosea11.1 follows
the Hebrew text. In the original context, Hosea 11.1 refers the Exodus and “my
son” refers Israel. Thus, application of this verse to Jesus seems to be
lifting the verse from the out of context and probably Matthew intends to
reinterpret the text. Brown observes that “Matthew sees that the filial
relationship of God’s people is now summed up in Jesus who relives in his own
life the history of that people.”[49] Further, it seems
unsuitable the phrase “out of Egypt” with the movement of the text because Jesus
was fleeing to Egypt in Mt.2.15. It may be more fitting after 2.21 than 2.15.[50]
Mt.2.18 quotes Jer.31.15; the citation is
more closer to Hebrew text. Rachel, wife of Jacob was buried in Bethlehem
(another tradition believes Zelzeh, near city of Bethel). Jeremiah imagines “Rachel’s spirit to be
haunting her tomb, still weeping for Israelites who had been deported by the
Assyrians a century before Jeremiah’s time.”[51] Matthew
connects the early life of Jesus with Exile of Israelites through the
quotation. In addition, the massacre of the children echoes the persecution in Egypt
particularly the killing of the male children.[52] Brown further says the
three citation mention about Bethlehem, the city of David; Egypt, the land of
Exodus and Ramah, the mourning-place of the Exile; this portrayal implies the
theological history of Israel in geographical miniature.[53]
Since Nazareth never mentioned in the OT,
it is a puzzle to find which text Matthew quotes in Mt.2.23; the word ‘the
prophets’ implies that Matthew might be paraphrasing more than one OT texts.
Scholars suspect Hebrew words nazir
and netser behind Matthean
“Nazorean.” Nazir means a person who
consecrated to God’s service by a vow. Netser
means branch, in Isa.11.1 it indicates coming king (according to later Jewish
interpretation Messiah).[54] Brown and Miller argue
that Matthew seems to be applied Isa.11.1
(netser) and Jud.16.17 (nazir).
Different versions of LXX translated Nazir
to Greek as hagios or naziraios. Greek version of Isa.4.3
says, “He will be called holy.” The interchangeability of hagios/naziraios,
mentioning of branch in Isa. 4.2 and 11.1 and Matthew’s apparent knowledge of
Markan use of Nazarenos and hagios in Mk.1.24 might have given a
twist and vagueness in Matthew which probably resulted in “He will be called a
Nazorean.”[55]
Conclusion
Matthew uses the pre-Matthean tradition to
compose his infancy narratives along with the Jewish understanding of Messaih
and Christian understanding of Jesus. The main purposes of the infancy
narrative includes apologetic towards Jewish allegations against Jesus, showing
the fulfilment of prophecies in Jesus, prologue to the entire gospel and
Christological emphasis. The story of Israel in the OT especially Exodus seems
to give a good background for infancy narratives. Infancy narratives appear to
presuppose Gentiles and Jews in the Matthean community.
Bibliography
Brown,
R.E. The Birth of the Messiah. New
York: Doubled,1977.
Carter, Warren. Matthew
and the Margins A Sociopolitical and Religious Reading.
Bangalore:TPI,2007.
Fuller, R.H. He That Cometh.
Harrisburg: Morehouse Publsihing,1990.
Freed, Edwin D. The Stories of
Jesus’ Birth A Critical Introduction. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press,2001
Hendrickx, Herman. Infancy
Narratives. London: Geoffrey Chapman,1975.
Horsley, Richard A. The
Liberation of Christmas The Infancy Narratives in Social Context. New
York:Crossroad,1989.
Meier, John P. Matthew.Collegeville: The Liturgical
Press,1980.
Miller, Robert J. Born
Divine The Birth of Jesus and Other Sons of God (California: Polebridge
Press,2003.
Tatum, W.B. “The Origin of Jesus Messiah (Matt 1:1,18a): Matthew’s Use
of the Infancy
Traditions.” Journal of Biblical Literature96/4
(1977): 523-535.
Witherington III, B. “Birth of Jesus.” Dictionary of Jesus and the
Gospels. Edited by Joel G.
Green,et.al. Illinois: Inter Varsity
Press,1992.
[1] R.H. Fuller, He That Cometh (Harrisburg: Morehouse Publsihing,1990),85-6; Brown,
The Birth of the Messiah
[3] B. Witherington III,
“Birth of Jesus,” Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, edited by Joel G.
Green,et.al., (Illinois: Inter Varsity Press,1992), .
[6] Richard A. Horsley, The
Liberation of Christmas The Infancy Narratives in Social Context (New
York:Crossroad,1989),7.
[11] W.B.Tatum, “The Origin of Jesus Messiah (Matt
1:1,18a): Matthew’s Use of the Infancy Traditions,” Journal of Biblical Literature96/4 (1977): 523.
[16] Warren Carter, Matthew
and the Margins A Sociopolitical and Religious Reading (Bangalore:TPI,2007),53.
[23] Robert J. Miller, Born Divine The Birth of Jesus and Other Sons of God (California:
Polebridge Press,2003),84-85.
[31] Edwin D.Freed, The Stories of Jesus’ Birth A Critical Introduction (Sheffield:
Sheffield Academic Press,2001.),51.