ACC ~ Matthew 1 v1

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.

Mt