ACC ~ Matthew 1 v1 - 17

OVERVIEW:

The divine lineage is an unfathomable mystery (ORIGEN). Christ’s true humanity is revealed in Matthew’s genealogy (SEVERUS). Matthew’s Gospel, written first in Hebrew, prominently displays Jesus’ kingly succession from David and blood lineage with Abraham (CHROMATIUS, HILARY, ANONYMOUS). The varied reports of Christ’s lineage are not inconsistent due to the distinction between blood father and adoptive father (AUGUSTINE). Isaac’s birth is prefigurative of the birth of Jesus, and Jacob’s twelve sons prefigure the twelve apostles of the age to come (ANONYMOUS). Christ took upon himself a blood relationship to the nature that fornicated, in order to purify it (SEVERUS). Thus Rahab the harlot is unapologetically in the lineage of the Lord, as well as Zerah, who prefigures the Jews under the law; Perez, who prefigures the Gentiles and the gospel; and notably David and Bathsheba (ANONYMOUS). The relation of Joseph and Mary stands as an enduring commendation to faithful married persons of the principle that even when by common consent they maintain their continence, the marital relation can still remain and can still be called one of wedlock. Joseph was truly the husband of Mary yet without the intercourse of the flesh (AUGUSTINE).

1:1 | The Genealogy of Jesus Christ

WHO WILL TELL OF JESUS’ LINEAGE?

ANONYMOUS: The Bible is like a storehouse of grace. For just as everyone finds whatever he desires in the storehouse of a rich man, so also does every soul find whatever is considered important in this book.

Why is it that Matthew says, “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, descendant of David, descendant of Abraham,” while the prophet Isaiah exclaims, “And who will tell of his lineage?” [1] Matthew is setting forth his fleshly line, while Isaiah proclaims that his divine lineage is an unfathomable mystery. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW. [2]

[1] Is 53:8.

[2] PG 56:612. The fifth-century anonymous commentary on Matthew’s Gospel, Incomplete Work on Matthew, is a Latin catena that contains passages from Jerome, Chromatius of Aquileia and Leo the Great. It ends at Matthew 25. See Clavis Patrum Latinorum 707; J. Banning, “The Critical Edition of the Incomplete Work on Matthew: An Arian Source,” in Studia Patristica 17 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982), pp. 382-87; R. Étaix, “Fragments Indits de l’Opus Imperfectum in Matthaei,” Revue bénédictine 84 (1974): 271-300.

JESUS’ HUMANITY REVEALED IN THE GENEALOGY

SEVERUS: One must bear in mind therefore that the Evangelists, or rather the Spirit speaking through them, took pains to ensure that their readers believed that Christ was truly God and truly human. Because of what they wrote, no one could possibly doubt that he is God by nature, beyond all variation, mutation or illusion, and that according to the ordered plan of God he was truly human. This is why John could say, on the one hand, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.” John immediately adds, “The Word was made flesh and dwelt among us.” [1] Hence Matthew wrote appropriately, “The book of the generation of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” On the one hand he is not able to be counted simply from natural generation among families, since it is written, “Who shall declare his generation?” [2] He is before the centuries and of one substance with the Father himself, from the standpoint of eternity. But by this genealogy he is also numbered among the families of humanity according to the flesh. For in truth, while remaining God, Christ became man without ceasing to be God, unaltered till the end of time.

This is why there is also mention of the ancient patriarchs in the lineage, the narrative and observation of the times and vicissitudes that are indeed proper to human history. Through all this Matthew made it clear that Christ participates in our human generation and in our nature. Otherwise some might claim that he appeared in illusion and in imagination only, rather than by becoming genuinely human. Think of what might have been said if none of this had been written? CATHEDRAL SERMONS, HOMILY 94. [3]

[1] Jn 1:1-2, 14.

[2] Is 53:8.

[3] PO 25:52-53.

WHY DAVID IS NAMED BEFORE ABRAHAM

ANONYMOUS: Furthermore, he did not say “of Jesus Christ, Son of God” but instead “Son of David, Son of Abraham.” But why then did John immediately point out the nature of his divinity by saying in the beginning of his Gospel, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God”? [1] Because John’s Gospel was set in exile among the Gentiles. He wrote in the Greek language for the benefit of the Gentiles, who knew little of such matters as whether God had a Son or in what sense God had offspring. Therefore it was important to first show to the Gentiles the mystery of his incarnation, since they did not know who he was at that time. For that reason it was first necessary for them to realize that the Son of God is God. Then, because God took on flesh, John said in the next phrase that “the Word was made flesh and lived among us.” [2]

Matthew instead wrote his Gospel to the Jews in the Hebrew language, just as I have already said, so that the Jews might be edified in faith. Indeed, the Jews always knew that he is the Son of God and how he is the Son of God. [3] Therefore it was unnecessary to explain to them the nature of his divinity, which they themselves knew quite well.

But why did he name David first when Abraham came before him in time? The first and straightforward reason is this: When the Evangelist proposed to recount the lineage of the Lord from Abraham, if he had first listed him as the descendant of Abraham, David would have come afterward. He realized it was necessary to return to Abraham again and to count him twice in this very place. [4] Moreover, there is the other reason that rank of kingdom is greater than rank of birth. For even if Abraham came first in time, David nevertheless came first in rank. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [5]

[1] Jn 1:1.

[2] Jn 1:14.

[3] The author claims that the Jews knew of the existence of the Son of God insofar as this existence, according to the Christian interpretation of the Old Testament, is announced and therefore made known by the prophecies.

[4] That is, Abraham is mentioned after David even though he preceded him in time, since with his name the Evangelist began the list of the generations.

[5] PG 56:612-13.

THE LINE OF DESCENT

CHROMATIUS: Therefore St. Matthew began writing his Gospel with an introduction of this sort, saying, “This is the book of Jesus Christ, descendant of David, descendant of Abraham. Abraham begot Isaac, Isaac begot Jacob,” and the rest that follows. Matthew, as I have said, tells of the second birth [1] of the Lord into flesh and for this reason traces his family line from Abraham, treating separately the tribe of Judah, until he comes down to Joseph and Mary. Since the Evangelist begins from Abraham by succession of birth and recounts in order the names of all, one may wonder why he calls Christ our Lord only the descendant of David and the descendant of Abraham in saying, “This is the book of the lineage of Jesus Christ, Son of David, Son of Abraham.” At any rate, we know that the Evangelist did not say this without reason and in this order. Each of them, both Abraham and David, whether by the promise of the Lord or rank of birth, lived as a worthy predecessor in the line of Jesus Christ as to his existence in flesh. For the Lord had promised to Abraham, who by right of circumcision was the founding patriarch of the Jewish people, that from his seed all nations would be blessed. This was realized in Christ, who received his body from the line of Abraham. The apostle made an interpretation for the Galatians about this, saying, “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his offspring. It does not say, ‘And to offsprings,’ referring to many; but, referring to one, ‘And to your offspring,’ which is Christ.” [2] So also is David first among the tribe of Judah in the rank of king. And likewise God promised to this very tribe that the eternal king, Christ the Lord, would be born from the fruit of its womb. For David was the first king from the tribe of Judah, from which the Son of God received his flesh. Thus Matthew rightly counted Christ our Lord as the descendant of David and Abraham, because both Joseph and Mary are descended from these regal origins, the line of David, who himself descended from Abraham, who in faith lived as the father of nations and in flesh was the first of the Jewish people. TRACTATE ON MATTHEW 1.1. [3]

[1] The Son is eternally generated from the Father and born into flesh in the incarnation; hence it is said that his incarnate birth is second to his eternal generation.

[2] Gal 3:16.

[3] CCL 9a:193-94.

THE KINGLY SUCCESSION PRESENTED BY MATTHEW

HILARY: What Matthew publishes in order of kingly succession, Luke has set forth in order of priestly origin. [1] While accounting for each order, both indicate the relationship of the Lord to each ancestral lineage. The order of his lineage is thus duly presented, because the association of the priestly and royal tribes that was begun through David from marriage is now confirmed out of the descent from Shealtiel to Zerubbabel. And so, while Matthew recounts his paternal origin that began in Judah, Luke teaches that his ancestry was taken from the tribe of Levi. Each in his own way demonstrates the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, who is both the eternal king and priest, as seen even in the fleshly origin of both of his ancestries. It does not matter that the origin of Joseph instead of Mary is recounted, for indeed there is one and the same blood relationship for the whole tribe. Moreover, both Matthew and Luke provide precedents. They name fathers in order not so much by their lineage as by their clan, since the tribe began from one individual and continues under a family of one succession and origin. Indeed, Christ has to be shown as the son of David and Abraham, so Matthew began in this way: “The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham.” It does not matter who is placed in a given order as long as the whole family is understood to derive from a single source. Joseph and Mary belonged to the same kinship line. Joseph is shown to have sprung from the line of Abraham. It is revealed that Mary came from this line, too. This system is codified in law so that, if the oldest of a family should die without sons, the next oldest brother of the same family would take the dead man’s wife in marriage. He would consider his sons as received into the family of the one who had died, and thus the order of succession remains with the firstborn, since they are considered to be the fathers of those born after them in either name or birth. ON MATTHEW 1.1. [2]

[1] The discrepancy between Matthew and Luke in the genealogy of Jesus was troublesome for the ancient exegetes. Hilary here explains it by deriving, from Luke, Jesus’ descent from the tribe of Levi, which had no territory of its own and thus was intermingled with the other tribes. In this way the Messiah’s royal (from Judah) as well as sacerdotal (from Levi) origin is revealed.

[2] SC 254:90-92. Hilary provides an explanation of why Matthew’s account of the ancestors of the Lord differs from Luke’s. Considered together they show in a complementary way that the Lord has both priestly and kingly ancestry. Both Mary and Joseph derive from Abraham and David.

EXPLAINING VARIED REPORTS OF THE LINEAGE:

AUGUSTINE: Some might be perplexed by the fact that Matthew enumerates one series of ancestors, descending through David to Joseph, [1] while Luke specifies a different succession, tracing the ancestry from Joseph backwards through David. [2] It was easy for them to perceive that Joseph was able to have two fathers, one blood father by whom he was born and another adoptive father by whom he was adopted. [3] Indeed, this was the custom of adoption even among that people of God. In this way they could endow sonship upon those whom they had not given birth. Recall how Pharaoh’s daughter adopted Moses [4] (and she was a foreigner). And Jacob himself adopted his own grandsons, the sons of Joseph: “And now your two sons, who were born to you in the land of Egypt, before I came to you in Egypt, are mine; Ephraim and Manasseh shall be mine, as Reuben and Simeon are. And the offspring born to you after them shall be yours.” [5] In this way, too, it came about that there were twelve tribes of Israel, with the tribe of Levi being given the special task of tending the temple. Along with this one there were thirteen tribes, although there had been twelve sons of Jacob. In this way it is understood that Luke included Joseph’s father in his Gospel, not by whom he was begotten but by whom he was adopted. He recounted his ancestors upwards until he came to David. HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.3.5. [6]

[1] Mt 1:1-16.

[2] Lk 3:23-38.

[3] According to Matthew 1:16, Joseph was the son of Jacob; according to Luke 3:23, on the other hand, Joseph was the son of Eli. The difficulty is resolved by hypothesizing a biological and an adoptive father.

[4] Ex 2:10.

[5] Gen 48:5-6.

[6] PL 34:1072-73; NPNF 1 6:103-4.

1:2 | Abraham, Isaac and Jacob

HOW ISAAC’S BIRTH PREFIGURES THE BIRTH OF JESUS

ANONYMOUS: Abraham was the father of the faithful, [1] and when God wished him to be an example for the virtuous, he said to him, “Go from your country and your kindred and your father’s house to the land that I will show you.” [2] So that all who should wish to be the sons of Abraham might know how to receive that living land of promise, it was written, “I believe that I will see the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living.” [3] … Those who do not wish to imitate Abraham in faith cannot be the descendants of Abraham. Then “Abraham was the father of Isaac,” [4] which itself was first interpreted as a jest. However, it is the laughter of the holy. It is not the idiotic cackling of lips but a rational joy of the heart, which was the mystery of Christ penetrating all things. For in this way Isaac was bestowed to parents who had long given up hope as a joy in their extreme old age. Isaac was not understood as a son of nature but as a son of grace. In this way Isaac was born by a Judean mother at the very end of her life as a joy for all to behold. In this same way the angel spoke to the shepherds: “Lo, I announce to you a great joy which will be for all people.” [5] And in this same way the apostle said, “When the time came, God sent his Son born of a woman, born under law.” [6] Although God’s son was born from a virgin and Isaac from an old woman, both were born wholly beyond the expectations of nature. The former [Isaac] had delayed until after his mother was able to give birth; the latter would arrive before his mother was able to give birth. [7] The former was born from an old woman who was already failing to some extent; the latter was born from a chaste virgin. The former was born under a law that was to end; the latter under grace that would remain. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [8]

[1] Alone among the texts quoted, this text explains each figure named in the genealogy. The interpretation is allegorical, and the allegory—derived mainly from the etymology of the names of the characters—is based on considering the Old Testament a symbolic and prophetic preparation for the New Testament, in such a way that the continuity between the Testaments—and therefore the Christian meaning of the Old Testament—is revealed. The explanation is too long to be reproduced in full and has been digested to treat only the interpretation of persons of particular historical or symbolic importance.

[2] Gen 12:1.

[3] Ps 27:13 (26:13 LXX).

[4] Gen 25:19.

[5] Lk 2:10.

[6] Gal 4:4.

[7] Note the ironic reversal in types: Isaac was delayed in coming until a time when his mother was beyond the natural capacity of giving birth, whereas Jesus was preexistent as divine Word even before his mother was called to give birth.

[8] PG 56:613.

HOW JACOB’S TWELVE SONS PREFIGURE THE TWELVE OF THE AGE TO COME

ANONYMOUS: Isaac then begot Esau and Jacob. This signifies two ages. Esau, who was covered with hair from head to toe, signifies the first age, which was filled completely from beginning to end with sin like the coarsest of hair. Yet Jacob, who was entirely handsome and refined, signifies the age to come. This age [1] will shine with the splendor of piety, and no harshness or stain of sin will be found in it. As Jacob held fast to Esau’s heel when he left his mother’s womb, he was thus named Jacob, which in Hebrew means “one who follows upon another’s heels.” [2] For just as the head of Jacob appeared as soon as the feet of his brother had come out, so also the beginning of the next age will appear immediately after the end of that first age. Just as Esau persecuted Jacob, the sons of that age persecute the sons of this age. And just as Jacob overcomes evil men by fleeing and not resisting, so also do his children. For just as Jacob’s mother then approached him and said, “Son, listen to me and flee to Mesopotamia until the anger of your brother subsides,” [3] so also does the church teach its children daily. Whenever they suffer persecution, it advises, “If you have been persecuted in one city, flee to another” [4] and never avenge yourselves. [5] “Then Jacob begot Judah and his brothers.” [6] Our Jacob [7] also begot the twelve apostles in spirit, not in flesh and in word, not in blood. For just as Jacob went down into Egypt with his twelve sons in order to multiply, so also did Christ descend into the world with his twelve apostles. He multiplied throughout the whole world, as the deed itself bears witness. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [8]

[1] Following the advent of Christ.

[2] Supplantator.

[3] Gen 27:43-44.

[4] Mt 10:23.

[5] Rom 12:19.

[6] Mt 1:2.

[7] Christ.

[8] PG 56:614.

1:3 | Judah and His Descendants

HOW COULD FORNICATORS BE IN JESUS’ LINEAGE?

SEVERUS: It is for this reason [to show Christ’s true humanity] that in this genealogy the Evangelist mentioned in his list even those who had shocking carnal relations that were inappropriate and outside the law. For Matthew wrote with due deliberation, “And Judah became the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar” and even more plainly “And David became the father of Solomon by Uriah’s wife.” These were women with whom they became united by fornication and adultery. By this means the genealogy revealed that it is our very sinful nature that Christ himself came to heal. It is that very nature which had fallen, revolted and plunged into inordinate desires. When our nature fled [from God], he took hold of it. When it dashed out and ran away in revolt, he stopped it, held onto it, enabled it to return and blocked its downward spiral. This is what the words of the apostle say in this regard: “For surely it is not with angels that he is concerned but with the descendants of Abraham. Therefore he had to be made like his brothers in every respect.” [1]

Christ therefore took upon himself a blood relationship to that nature which fornicated, in order to purify it. He took on that very nature that was sick, in order to heal it. He took on that nature which fell, in order to lift it up. All this occurred in a charitable, beneficial manner wholly appropriate to God.

Although sinless, he became united to the flesh that is of the same essence as ours, which possesses an intelligent soul. It is with this premise that the gestation and conception from the Holy Spirit was spoken and the virgin birth occurred, the birth that knew not marriage or carnal union and that respected in an unspeakable manner the seal of virginal purity. CATHEDRAL SERMONS, HOMILY 94. [2]

[1] Heb 2:16-17.

[2] PO 25:53-54.

PEREZ AND ZERAH AS TYPES

ANONYMOUS: We note how Judah became “the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar.” [1] But note how the mysteries of the Jewish and Gentile people were being anticipated: Zerah [symbolic of Israel] was the first to come forth from the womb. The midwife “took and bound on his hand a scarlet thread,” signifying the Jewish people marked with the blood of circumcision. Zerah withdrew, and Perez [symbolic of the Gentiles] came out. The flesh in which Zerah had been enclosed was blocked. But the flesh in which Perez had been enclosed opened up. Therefore Perez came out first. [2] Thus the Jewish people appeared first in the light of faith, as though proceeding from the dark womb of the world. They were therefore marked with the scarlet thread of circumcision, everyone believing that this people of God would be first. But what then happened?

The law was placed before them as a hedge to stand in the way of God’s judgment. Yet the law, as we learn, may impede faith and not help; as it is written: “without the law sin was dead. Once upon a time I was living without law, but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.” [3] Thus, due to sin, the law impeded the way of the Jewish people, so they did not bring in the light of justice. But when Christ came in due time, the hedge of the law that was between the Jews and the Gentiles was broken, as the apostle says: “[He] has broken down the dividing wall of hostility.” [4] So it happened that the Jewish people, who were first to come, were held captive, while the Gentiles remained as though in the womb of the dark world. After the law was broken at Christ’s bidding, with the Jewish people being excluded, the Gentiles were first to come to faith [in the gospel]. Later the Jewish people will follow, as the apostle says: “Behold, I tell you a mystery [ … ] a partial blindness only has be-fallen Israel, until the full number of the Gentiles should enter, and thus all Israel will be saved.” [5] INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [6]

[1] Mt 1:3.

[2] Gen 38:27-30.

[3] Rom 7:8-10.

[4] Eph 2:14.

[5] 1 Cor 15:51; Rom 11:25-26.

[6] PG 56:614-15.

1:4 | Salmon Fathered Boaz

RAHAB WHO LOVED ISRAEL A FIGURE OF THE CHURCH

ANONYMOUS: “Nahshon brought forth Salmon.” The name Salmon is interpreted “take the vessel.” Salmon married Rahab. This Rahab is said to have been a harlot from Jericho, who took in spies and envoys from the children of Israel. And when the king of Jericho sought the spies so that he might put them to death, Rahab hid them on the roof of her house and kept them safe from harm. Hearing of the deeds of the children of Israel, she loved Israel more than her own people. And this fact seems to be doubly credible to me. Since Salmon was considered noble among the children of Israel and was of the tribe of Judah and the son of the prince, he saw the faithful Rahab thus converted to goodness and beloved by God and led from Jericho at God’s command and counted among the daughters of Israel. Such a wonderful woman surely deserved to become Salmon’s wife.

I therefore believe, in terms of a spiritual mystery, that Rahab the harlot was a figure of the church. Though a harlot among the people and defiled by the worship of idols, she received the messengers (i.e., the apostles) of Jesus Christ into the home of her heart because of their words. She hid them on top of the storehouse of her mind, so that the prince of the world, the devil, might not find them nor put to death those who with the sign of the scarlet cord had also been lowered down through the window. It was as though saved by the mark of the Lord’s passion, led out of the world and made chaste, that she became the bride of Christ.

This Rahab, after she married Salmon, was named Rachab, [1] which is interpreted “ascent.” Indeed, just as Rahab ascended bodily, having been made one of the daughters of Israel and dignified by marriage to that man, she also ascended spiritually. For although the church was once a worshiper of idols, she became the companion of angels, the bride of Christ and the daughter of God. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [2]

[1] Latin Raab to Rachab.

[2] PG 56:618.

1:5 | Boaz Fathered Obed

THE UNION OF RUTH AND BOAZ BROUGHT FORTH A ROYAL NATION

ANONYMOUS: As for Salmon, which is interpreted “take the vessel,” what son did he beget from Rahab? Boaz is interpreted as “in strength” or “strength in him” or “showing strength.” At God’s command Boaz took as his wife Ruth, who had been provided by God. In strength he brings forth children who are strong in themselves and distinguished. But those who take wives provided by the devil (i.e., with no awareness of religion) and who are not faithful bring forth children in feebleness. They are neither prominent nor strong except in doing evil. As punishment for their impious ways, they seem to have brought forth children neither in joy nor in consolation.

And so, Boaz took as his wife a Moabite woman named Ruth. I believe it is superfluous to tell how he took her, since on this subject Scripture is clear to all. We, however, will say only one thing. It was by the merit of her faith that Ruth married Boaz. She viewed with indifference her own people, land and race and chose Israel. She did not shun her bereaved and foreign mother-in-law, being led by the desire of this race rather than her own. She renounced the gods of her ancestors and chose the living God, saying these words to her mother-in-law: “Do not ask me to leave you or to turn back from following you; for where you go I will go, and where you lodge I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God; where you die I will die, and there I will be buried. May the Lord do so to me and more also if even death parts me from you.” [1] Therefore Boaz by the merit of Ruth’s faith took her as his wife, so that through this sanctified union a royal nation might be born. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [2]

[1] Ruth 1:16-17.

[2] PG 56:618-19.

1:6 | Jesse Fathered David and His Dynasty

HOW DAVID PREFIGURED CHRIST AND THE CHURCH

ANONYMOUS: “Jesse brought forth David the king,” for God is in the generation of the just, and the generation of the righteous shall be blessed. What can we say concerning David, whose role in Scripture is that of king? Passing over all else, we can at least say this: David prefigured Christ. David is interpreted as “able of hand” or “beloved,” just as Christ was. He was strong in battle and powerful and beloved by his country. In his acts, in mercy and in his gentleness, he was prophetically anticipating Christ. But how does this apply to his unjust abuses, as distinguished from his just actions? Even in his worst sin lay the mystery of Christ and the church. David, taking delight on his high roof, saw the very beautiful Bathsheba bathing, desired her and beckoned her, though she was married to a Hittite man. There is a prefiguring even here, though it may seem unlikely. Christ, while in his high heaven and still joyful in his divinity, saw in advance the very attractive church of his people displeasing him with sordid behavior and weakening in good works, when it was still the devil’s bride. He laid eyes on her, loved her and drew her to himself. [1] INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [2]

[1] Here the author of the Opus imperfectum stretches credibility in pressing to find analogies between David and Christ, as well as Bathsheba and the church.

[2] PG 56:620.

SOLOMON’S BUILDING OF THE TEMPLE PREFIGURES CHRIST

ANONYMOUS: “David brought forth Solomon.” Solomon is interpreted as “peaceful.” He is called “peaceful” because he provided a peaceful kingdom for all the people in the territory who were peace-loving and taxpaying so he might build a temple to God, using also the ministry of the people. In this way Solomon was a figure of our peace-loving Christ, who, for all people fleeing to him in faith and paying the spiritual taxes of good works, provided a peaceful kingdom, built with living stones—not only Jews but also Gentiles—so that he might build a living temple to the living God. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [1]

[1] PG 56:621.

GOD UNASHAMED OF STOOPING TO SAVE SINNERS

SEVERUS: The Evangelist exposes and derides the passions of our race, its dishonors and ailments, to which the Word of God descended in his mercy. He descended to glorify them and raise them up by his charity. It in no way reflects badly upon the physician that he stoops to the level of those who are sick. Matthew could have written, “David became the father of Solomon by Bathsheba” (the name of the woman involved). In deriding, so to speak, adultery itself, he rather stated clearly, “And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah.” He thus showed that Christ, who descended from such a degenerate race by generation, “took up our infirmities and bore the burden of our ills,” [1] as one of the prophets said. CATHEDRAL SERMONS, HOMILY 94. [2]

[1] Is 53:4; Mt 8:17.

[2] PO 25:55.

1:7-15 | Solomon and His Descendants

THE REBELLIOUS MULTITUDE ANTICIPATED

ANONYMOUS: Solomon symbolizes the Christian people who were just beginning to flourish. Rehoboam, however, symbolizes a people in decline. When Solomon sinned in old age, the Lord let loose Satan upon him, and a crucial part of his kingdom was cut away. However, Rehoboam rejected the advice of the elders at a critical time and followed that of his young courtiers. He lost nearly his entire kingdom when ten tribes split away and appointed their own kings. Only two tribes remained under Rehoboam’s rule. [1] INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [2]

[1] 1 Kings 11—12; cf. 2 Chron 10.

[2] PG 56:621.

1:16 | Joseph and Mary

THE MARITAL RELATION BETWEEN JOSEPH AND MARY

AUGUSTINE: Matthew relates the human lineage of Christ in this way: After recounting the fathers from Abraham, he continues to Joseph, the husband of Mary, from whom Jesus was born. It is not fitting to think of Joseph apart from his marriage to Mary, who bore Christ as a virgin and not from intercourse with him. [1] For by his example an incomparable commendation is made to faithful married persons of the principle that even when by common consent they maintain their continence, the marital relation can still remain steadfast and still be rightly called one of wedlock, not by virtue of physical intercourse but by the heart’s affection. This is especially so because it was possible for a son to be born to them without bodily embrace, which is intended within the purpose of procreation. Furthermore, Joseph should not have been denied being called Christ’s father on the basis that he did not beget him through intercourse. For if he had adopted a child from another, he would have rightly been the father of one who was not even born from his own wife.

Indeed, Christ was even considered by some to be the son of Joseph, just as if he had been simply born of his flesh. But this was believed by those who did not know of Mary’s virginity. Luke says, “Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph.” [2] Instead of naming Mary his only parent, he had not the slightest hesitation in also speaking of both parties as his parents when he says, “And the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom; and the favor of God was upon him. Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the Passover.” [3] Lest any imagine that by the “parents” here was meant only Mary and her blood relations, we do well to recall that preceding word of Luke: “And his father and mother marveled at what was said about him.” [4] HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.1.2-3. [5]

[1] Joseph did not disengage himself from the married estate into which he entered with Mary on the ground that she gave birth not as the wedded wife of Joseph but as a virgin.

[2] Lk 3:23.

[3] Lk 2:40-41.

[4] Lk 2:33.

[5] PL 34:1071-72; NPNF 1 6:102-3*. In what way, Augustine asks, did Joseph remain the husband of Mary the virgin? Though Joseph was not the physical father, nonetheless he was a real and significant father to Jesus and continued in an enduring relation with Mary. In what follows, a single asterisk (*) indicates that the previous English translation has been dearchaized.

WITHOUT INTERCOURSE OF THE FLESH

AUGUSTINE: Since he thus related that Christ was born from Mary as a virgin and not as a result of intercourse with Joseph, for what reason does Matthew call him his father, if not because we understand Joseph to be truly the husband of Mary, not through intercourse of the flesh but in virtue of the genuine spiritual union of marriage? … All this suggests that Luke’s phrase, “as was supposed,” was inserted with a view of correcting those of the opinion that he was born from Joseph in the same way that others are born. HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.1.3. [1]

[1] PL 34:1072.

1:17 | Three Groups of Fourteen Generations

FORTY GENERATIONS IN THREE CYCLES

AUGUSTINE: This particular number of generations, totaling forty, is a sign of that laborious period in which, under the discipline of Christ the King, we will continue to fight against the devil. The same number was foreshadowed in both the law and the prophets, who had already solemnized a fast of forty days for the humbling of the soul (this pattern was firmly set in the narratives of Moses and Elijah, each of whom fasted for forty days). [1] The Gospel narrative itself then again foreshadowed this same number in the fast of the Lord himself, during his forty days of temptation by the devil. [2] What else does this narrative show than that condition of temptation which pertains to us through all the space of this age? [3] Christ bore this temptation in the flesh when he condescended to take upon himself our own mortality.

Add to this also that after his resurrection, it was his will to remain with his disciples on the earth not longer than forty days. [4] During this time he continued to mingle his resurrected life with theirs in the form of human intercourse. He shared with them food, which mortals need for life, even though he himself would never die. All this was done with the view of signifying to them through these forty days that although his presence would be later hidden from their eyes, he would yet fulfill what he promised when he said, “I am with you, even to the end of the world.” [5]

There may be other and subtler methods of accounting for the length of this age, but the most apparent anticipations within the natural order of this number are the seasons of the years, which revolve in four successive alternations. Note also the fact that the world itself has its bounds determined by four divisions (which Scripture sometimes designates by the names of the winds, east and west, north or south). [6] The number forty then is four times the cycle-completing number ten. The number ten, of course, is itself made up by adding one, two, three and four together. HARMONY OF THE GOSPELS 2.4.9. [7]

[1] Ex 34:28; 1 Kings 19:8.

[2] Mt 4:1-2.

[3] Between Christ’s coming and his coming again.

[4] Acts 1:3.

[5] Mt 28:20.

[6] Zech 14:4.

[7] PL 34:1075; NPNF 1 6:105**. Why were there three cycles of fourteen generations, or forty generations from Abraham to David to Christ? This was to point back to the typological significance of the number forty as repeatedly foreshadowed in the law and prophets and then reappearing in the narrative of Jesus’ life. In what follows, a double asterisk (**) indicates that an earlier English translation has been used with significant modifications.

PRIOR SALVATION HISTORY

ANONYMOUS: “So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations.” When the Evangelist could have briefly explained the number of generations by saying, “From Abraham to Christ there are forty-two generations,” for what reason did he three times omit generations and divide them into three parts of fourteen generations each? Because the human situation among the Jews was changed three times, with fourteen generations cycling three times. First, from Abraham to David, they were under the judges. Second, from David to the exile, they were under the kings. Third, from the exile to Christ, they were under the high priests.

So this demonstrates that just as fourteen generations were completed three times, the state of humanity was altered. So with fourteen generations completed from the exile to Christ, the state of humanity from Christ on must be once again changed. This indeed happened. After Christ, the generations were no longer under so many judges, or so many kings or so many high priests. Rather all generations came forth under one Christ who was Judge and King and High Priest. For in those three states, only he finally had dignity.

Therefore, since the judges and kings and high priests prefigured the three offices of Christ, their beginnings were always to be understood as anticipatory figures of Christ. Joshua was the first judge; David, the first king; and Jeshua, the son of Josedech, the first high priest. No one doubts that these men were prefiguring Christ. … The reason why forty-two generations are given according to the flesh of Christ being born into the world is this: forty-two is the product of six times seven. Six, however, is the number that signifies work and toil, for the world was made in six days—it is a world made in work and toil and pain. So, appropriately, there are forty-two generations before Christ being born into the world in toil and pain, and these generations contain the mystery of work and toil. INCOMPLETE WORK ON MATTHEW, HOMILY 1. [1]

[1] PG 56:629-30.